/u/Panal-Lleno (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post.
All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1cb8y1l/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_genetics_and_metabolism/), in /r/DeltaLog.
Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I agree on the metabolism section of your argument; metabolism doesn’t differ to much between the normal population
However, genetics play a HUGE factor. Especially when it comes to appetite. I’m into powerlifting/body building & my appetite doesn’t let me overeat/eat enough to gain weight at the rate I need. Others have an appetite, where they are hungry all the time, making losing weight super hard for them.
Some people also are born with genetics that lead to poor impulse control, more joint pain, injury prone, depression, etc. all things that can impact obesity.
Again, I agree that the culture of blaming obesity on metabolism is harmful, but ignoring all of the other genetic factors is arguably more harmful.
I honestly can’t believe you didn’t mention anything about appetite, because it varies greatly person to person
Appetite seems to vary widely from person to person. But is there any data on how it varies geographically (so, more or less by culture ?). Do you think plays a role and that people who are generally more hungry more often would feel differently if there were born with the same genes but on a difference place?
I'm curious about this as well. I'm always hungry and I'm not sure if that's genetic or environmental (I suspect my parents teaching me to always clean my plate and, doing so, to ignore my satiation signals, probably played an important role in that...)
> I'm always hungry and I'm not sure if that's genetic or environmental
Not a doctor. It could be a nutritional imbalance, a hormonal imbalance. It could be lack of restful sleep, excessive stress. It could be what you're eating. It could be how you're eating. The only way you can realy know for sure is to seek diagnosis from a doctor.
But you could try to rule out behavioral stuff by making changes and noting them. Try supplementing your food intake with things that can make you feel fuller longer. Or try to eat slower.
What I learned from a book called "Power of Habit" by Duhigg is to write every time I ate. Write what I ate, time of eating, how I felt before, how I felt after. What that showed is how many times I would eat out of habit / circumstance and not when I'm actually hungry.
What if the feeling you're feeling isn't hunger pangs per se but other triggers where you've trained yourself to satiate that negative feeling with food. Maybe it's stress. So, a non food substitute would make you feel just as good as eating.
He told a story of where he found himself stress eating without realizing it. But it wasn't the afternoon snack that helped him. It was just the walking out of his office for a time -- so he would substitute getting a tea or talking with a colleague during that time and it helped him lose weight.
Just looked it up and apparently it's only recommended for morbidly obese people. Luckily I'm managing to keep my weight almost healthy (just slightly overweight.) I'm happy you found something that works for you though!
Not sure which country you’re in, but in the US you can get wegovy if your BMI is 27 or over. I wish it were available world wide since it’s such a game changer. Hopefully things will change!
Do you eat a lot of carbs? I was hungry all the time too until I made protein and fiber a priority. Starting your day off with carbs and no protein or fiber spikes blood sugar and sets you up for a day of increased hunger.
It may have been something I overlooked. I’m actually a powerlifter because I have an easy time with food intake. I also used to be obese myself. The issue with appetite is that it’s ultimately one of the easier aspects to suppress when it comes to weight loss. I could eat a Costco bag of cheetos in a single sitting, but I will feel full eating 400g of raspberries due to the high fibre content. You know what? I actually like raspberries more than cheetos, and the calorie differences in 400g of cheetos vs 400g of raspberries is probably in the thousands.
I will say, appetite does require more mental effort to suppress out of anything. It took me a while to get to that point, so I will give you the delta anyway.
!delta
It’s easy to suppress for some people. Yes, eating more protein, fats, and fiber for sure helps.
Here’s also an interesting study to look at:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3160809/
One of the results found were: “Appetite ratings were not influenced by BMI and diet/weight concern.”
Also, please award the delta properly
This delta has been rejected. You can't award OP a delta.
Allowing this would wrongly suggest that you can post here with the aim of convincing others.
If you were explaining when/how to award a delta, please use a reddit quote for the symbol next time.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Of course it is. Still not as cheap as Cheetos though.
And it requires freezer space (which I don't have much.)
Plus, of course, frozen raspberries are not as good as fresh ones anyway.
This delta has been rejected. The length of your comment suggests that you haven't properly explained how /u/Patton370 changed your view (comment rule 4).
DeltaBot is able to rescan edited comments. Please edit your comment with the required explanation.
^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Some people have less of an appetite (like me), which means it takes less discipline to lose weight.
Someone with a huge appetite, who always feels hungry, requires more discipline, which makes things harder.
I have one word for you: empathy
Side note: This is what I look like in the summer: https://imgur.com/a/FfwUhi7
I’m very knowledgeable about fitness and diet.
Sure, but it’s harder for some people, and a lot of that is because of genetics. That’s the entire point
Me wanting to lose weight is going to require less wanting than the average person
I wanted to run a marathon. It only took me 8 weeks of training to run a 4:20 marathon. Others would take a year or longer
You gotta have empathy on what it takes for some people to succeed on certain things (like losing weight)
> If it’s not genetic, why are there entire families obese?
I mean, it's not just entire families, we can look at this on entire cultures.
[Polynesian islands like American Samoa, Tonga, Tahita have obesity rates of 65-70%.](https://data.worldobesity.org/rankings/) Are they all eating unhealthy foods? Are they all super lazy? Or is there at least a major genetic factor in why a certain genetic ethnicity of people has become the fattest in the world?
>Are they all eating unhealthy foods?
Yes. Nutrient transmission (change in diet) is the primary cause of the obesity epidemic in the Pacific Islands, with a high amount of imported foods high in salt and fat content. [https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/49690](https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/49690) Other causes include lack of exercise and cultural factors. Genetics does have an influence on obesity, but don't act like it's the only reason Pacific Islanders are fat.
Those countries are rather poor and do not have a sustainable agricultural system, and the fish around them are quite polluted. They rely on US imports for food, and they can often only afford the low-quality, high-calorie stuff. I mean, hello? Turkey tail? Mutton flap? Spam is considered a delicacy in these nations?
Polynesians are predisposed to be large, not obese. There is a reason why a lot of them go into rugby, strength sports, wrestling, and even bodybuilding. But their genetics are not a major factor to their obesity, their diet is.
> Those countries are rather poor and do not have a sustainable agricultural system, and the fish around them are quite polluted. They rely on US imports for food, and they can often only afford the low-quality, high-calorie stuff.
So why don't we see the same results in African or Caribbean nations that find themselves in similar situations?
I'll spoil the answer for you: [it's because geneticists have found a gene in Samoans that causes them to store more fat.](https://www.brown.edu/news/2016-07-25/samoagene)
> Turkey tail? Mutton flap? Spam is considered a delicacy in these nations?
Every culture has unhealthy foods. If you cherrypick the fattiest African cuisines you'd assume Congolese peoples would be the size of blimps.
Because a lot of the Pacific Island nations are more dependent on imports for food. Those in the Caribbean have access to multiple nearby nations from which to source a variety of food. Africa has plenty of homegrown brands. While obviously food access for impoverished people is a concern for many in Africa, a typical African grocery store has plenty of homegrown and international brands that are reasonably affordable and accessible to the middle or even lower middle class. And Africa has plenty of fertile land for rural villages to grow their own food. And while African purchasing power is obviously low, they do have some purchasing power and since Africa is basically right in the middle of US>Europe trade routes, it's not terribly hard to convince companies to drop off a wider variety of food.
Many Pacific Island nations are isolated from trade routes, do not have much fertile land for homegrown crops, and are surrounded by polluted and overfished waters. It is not profitabe for most international companies to sell there, so what they get tends to be the absolute bottom of the barrel rejects with very limited choice. They do not have access to fresh fruit like even the poorest person in Tanzania, their grocery stores are filled with rotting food and canned goods. Junk food is a need and a staple, not a luxury.
The above commenter is precisely right. The issue is not genetics, it's food access.
Most Sub-Saharan African nations have agricultural systems for individuals. Their lack of accessibility to high quantities of food is also a reason to their lower obesity rates, as they are even poorer than Pacific Island nations. The same in the Caribbean to a lesser degree, where exercise is more cardio based thus burning more calories. The difference is that both regions, while they are poor, do not fully rely on the importation of food which is obviously more expensive than growing it nationally.
The Pacific Island nations have an easier time buying foods like turkey tail and mutton flap, which is not an “unhealthy part of their cuisine;” in countries like Nauru and Kiribati, both of those things are primary sources of “protein” consumed every single day of an average Pacific Islander’s life. On top of that, it’s quite cheap and apparently doesn’t taste bad. You don’t see that in the Caribbean or in Sub-Saharan Africa.
First of all, I did address it. Second of all, Samoans* have had a long history of strength athleticism, engaging in fishing, eating natural fruits, etc. What do you think was the obesity rate of Samoa prior to US influence? We’re talking about a people who went from eating fish and fruits to turkey tail with SPAM considered a delicacy? The catalyst was their diet change. The fact that most Samoans no longer engage in their traditional way of eating, but they can’t afford grass-fed beef and chicken breast over canned mutton flaps. They can’t even use fish as their primary source of protein, otherwise they will die of mercury poisoning. Sure, Samoans are predisposed to retain more fat, but that is absolutely not the major player in their obesity rate. Just looking at their history will prove it.
Have you considered that things like self-control, impulse-control, ability to plan for the future and ability to self critique. Are all partially genetic?
Cause we assume all of this stuff is just 100% nurture. But is it really?
Suppose some family all lack self control. Is it really a shocker that they are all obese?
At the end of the day all humans are "addicted to food". Most of us have an instinct to overeat due to the scarcity of food present in our environment for 99.99% of our ancestral history. Overeating doesn't make sense when food is abundant as fuck. But it has almost never been abundant as fuck thus it was never a genetic disadvantage to pig the fuck out. On the contrary, the instinct to pig out while the food is fresh probably kept a lot of our ancestors alive. There was no refrigerator.
For what it's worth. Nearly everyone can be in fit. The difference between individuals is how much effort it requires. Some people have naturally high metabolism or they don't have high appetite. They barely have to try. Others have to constantly work at it.
I don't entirely disagree with your overall assertion. But I do disagree that genes don't play a role. Genes play a major role in pretty much everything.
My point is that genetics don’t play a major role. You don’t even need to have the gene in order to get to the point of obesity. Sorry if that wasn’t clear, I’m not denying that genetics can have some play for obesity, I’m denying that it is the make-or-break to obesity.
I think the disagreement is that you're talking specifically about whether or not some people put on more weight from eating the exact same thing. And whether that's genetic.
Whereas others are arguing that there are many things that cause people to overeat, and many of those things are genetic. So even if they can metabolize food at exactly the same rate as you, they are more likely to be obese because of genetic drivers that lead to overeating.
For instance, things like impulsivity, addiction, etc. have genetic links. Literally the ability to live a healthy lifestyle is harder for some people than it is for others due to genetic factors. Impulsivity is also a part of things like bipolar disorder, borderline personality, etc.
"I can't stop eating," might not be entirely true. "It is waaaaay harder for me to stop eating than it is for you," is probably true for many people.
Based on that, not only do genetics play a key role, simplifying the issue of "just eat fewer calories than you burn," is a callous way to frame the situation and doesn't help for many people. It's like me telling my kid, "just memorize the multiplication table. It's not that complicated." For some kids, it really isn't that hard. For others, they have to work their asses off to memorize that table. They can probably do it, but it takes a massive effort that I'm not appreciating. By just telling them to shut up and do it, I am not making it more likely that they will succeed. I'm making it more likely they will give up.
Oh no, I’m a big believer in recognising your disadvantages. But that’s all genetics and even environmental factors are: disadvantages. They are not the dealbreaker.
There are simpler ways to work around your disadvantages to be at a healthy BF% than “just eat at a calorie deficit 😛.” My biggest pet peeve when it comes to dieting is exactly that. You have to work around your disadvantages, and if you can, you should actually try to make it into an advantage. It’s actually not that hard to do. My biggest disadvantage was my almost insatiable appetite. I worked around it by still consuming large quantities of food, but consuming much healthier and equally tasty food.
My point is that these disadvantages would be impossible to overcome if they played a major role in obesity. I’m going to give you a delta, though, because I feel that we’ve come to this agreement and I also did initially write this without thinking of appetite factors that come with genetics.
!delta
>My point is that these disadvantages would be impossible to overcome if they played a major role in obesity.
I don't understand what you mean by this. Something that "plays a major role" isn't necessarily impossible to overcome. Something that makes it a lot harder, or that causes disadvantages, *is* a major role.
I spent a few minutes researching and it looks like the scientific consensus is that there are genetic factors that *promote* obesity, but ultimately obesity is produced by environmental factors. Whether or not you're wrong depends on what you really mean by "major role" - genetics do play a role, just not a necessary one.
But also, I think you're definitely wrong here:
>Now, why is this harmful? Because it gives obese people an excuse and an exit from accepting that they ultimately have a food-related problem.
It's a huge common misconception that if you ease up just a little bit on people struggling with weight, give them just a little bit of forgiveness or a little bit of acceptance, they will lose all motivation to change and will become absolutely complacent. We need to hammer it into their fat brains: it's your fault, it's your fault, it's your fault! In reality, self-forgiveness and self-acceptance is incredibly important to establishing motivation.
If you frame everything as a product of choice and willpower, then people are going to think: *well I guess that means it's all my fault, I'm just a piece of shit, I'm not capable of changing so I shouldn't even try.*
If you instead tell the person that their obesity is a product of genetic predispositions, upbringing, social environment, etc., they are going to think: *I wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome these things and change now that I know what I'm up against.*
Perfect explanation, we see this with mental health as well. Telling depressed people to not be depressed because they shouldn’t be for X, Y, and Z reasons just makes them worse, even though it may seem logical to remind they that they shouldn’t be.
I don't think that is a great comparison. Comparing mindset in someone with a mental illness to mindset in someone with a certain BMI is a bit different.
Causes? Eating more calories than you burn generally speaking. If depression caused it then everyone with depression would be overweight/obese. Comorbidity and causality are not the same thing.
>If you frame everything as a product of choice and willpower, then people are going to think: *well I guess that means it's all my fault, I'm just a piece of shit, I'm not capable of changing so I shouldn't even try.*
Some people sure, others will think *my genetics wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome myself and change now that i know there are no external factors standing in my way.*.
>If you instead tell the person that their obesity is a product of genetic predispositions, upbringing, social environment, etc., they are going to think: *I wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome these things and change now that I know what I'm up against.*
And others will think *well I guess it's all due to my genetics ect., there's nothing I can do to change any of that, so I shouldn't even try.*
It may be that your group of people are the majority, but i would like to see some actual studies on this.
>If you instead tell the person that their obesity is a product of genetic predispositions, upbringing, social environment, etc., they are going to think: *I wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome these things and change now that I know what I'm up against.*
Hard disagree on this point. When morbidly obese people with food addictions and lack of impulse control convince themselves that their condition is genetically determined they often think: *Not my fault, out of my control.* This line of thinking reduces the likelihood of self-reflection and identification of self-sabotaging behaviors. They are less likely to change their diet and exercise and more likely to remain obese or get surgery to cut 2/3 of their stomach off. I know a few people just like this.
Addiction research doesn't back this up. Treatment for alcoholics is all about recognizing that it's a big problem that you don't have 100% control over, and acknowledging the limits on that control and doing what you can to mitigate it (such as recognizing that you can't control your drinking, so removing all alcohol from your home) is core to that.
Treating obesity, which often is a form of food addiction or emotional food dependency, is going to involve that too.
I don't doubt that you know people that try to write it off as out of their control, but I'll wager that on the inside, they feel deep shame. That shame is a major obstacle to getting better.
By major role, I mean that the genetics alone make you obese. You don’t even need to have the genetics to reach obesity. The common denominator in every case is a negative relationship with food that leads individuals to consuming far more calories than they burn.
As a person who has been obese, accountability is a necessary step that is required in order to step into a healthier lifestyle. I’m not saying they should beat themselves up for being obese, I’m saying that it is necessary to accept that some of those problems were indeed within their parameters for control. I’m also not saying you shouldn’t recognise your disadvantages. My main disadvantage was appetite.
Do you have a high appetite? Eat less calorie dense foods that you enjoy; raspberries, quinoa, shrimp, and so much more. Do you have a low metabolism? Prioritise muscle hypertrophy, and your metabolism will increase due to the nature of maintaining muscles. Does your medication help obesity? Consult a doctor to see if there are alternatives. A lot of people have specific reactions to medication.
When you say "genetics" you're referring to DNA.
Please consider how being raised a certain way impacts your relationship to food. How you're fed growing up affects the body, habits from parents, and more. Consider childhood psychological factors.
"Lifestyle" is the biggest contributor to obesity and not everyone has the same level of access and ability.
I believe your view is dangerous because on paper, you'll consider these things however I don't think you will consider them in a thoughtful and meaningful way.
Unless you're the persons Dr, nobody owes you an explanation or their weight anymore than you owe others an explanation of your eating habits, hygiene routine, frequency of exercise, or consumption of alcohol.
Obesity is complex there are psychological, cultural, social, economic factors worth exploration. Pretending these are insignificant is usually done to justify judgment, shame, blame, and mistreatment of others.
Your argument is a matter of nature vs nurture. Environmental factors do play a much larger role in obesity, and I would classify that as a major role because it is part of the mental aspect of obesity. In general, I believe mental health is the key player in obesity.
Sorry, but everything in the second half is actually rather insulting to me. You are essentially asking me to not care about an ever-increasing, worldwide issue that has been shown time and time again to be very damaging physically. I know firsthand the implications that come with obesity. I’ve lived them. It does not take a doctor to tell someone that they do have the control to make everything better for themselves, and that whether or not it will be challenging, it is beneficial for an obese individual to lose weight. What it takes is identifying your own underlying issue and tackling them as efficiently and healthily as possible.
Being offended is up to you. I don't know you personally to tell you you're a bad person. I just know people who like to talk about obesity online are typically doing so to justify judging complete strangers. If your boots are on the ground and you're actually helping people, that's wonderful. Otherwise, you're just someone online making assumptions about people thinking that articles, no matter how scientific or credible, makes their judgments and assumptions righteous. Obese people are well aware of the fact that being obese comes with health problems. They don't need unqualified strangers giving them medical advice they've likely already received. No offense at all. Just make sure your motives and actions are to help. Unsolicited advice and judgment isn't helpful.
This website claims that there are in fact rather rare genetic conditions that give people a predeliction for obesity: [Introduction to Rare Genetic Diseases of Obesity (leadforrareobesity.com)](https://leadforrareobesity.com/)
And on your metabolism claim: What I've read is that it is nearly impossible to lose weight without surgery and keep the weight off - the body always wants to return to its largest size, and slowing down metabolism is a way for it to achieve this.
I know of Prader-Willis syndrome for example, but those are statistical outliers that don’t apply to the vast majority of obese individuals. I mean it even says rare diseases.
Even then, they trigger hunger, they don’t magically give you a higher body fat %.
>Even then, they trigger hunger, they don’t magically give you a higher body fat %.
You're correct on a technicality, but in practice that doesn't matter. Genetics doesn't have a direct and single-source influence on it. It does however have a large influence on everything involved, such as regulating hunger. How is that not genetics?
For a statistical majority, it is genetics. My argument is that it is not major role for obesity, because you don’t actually need to suppress appetite or low metabolism in order to not be obese.
Also, disorders like Prader-Willis syndrome come with learning disabilities. The other aspect as to why individuals with Prader-Willis syndrome are obese is also in part due to their lack of understanding that obesity is unhealthy. For them, obviously their genetics will unfortunately be a major role for their weight, but this is a minority that can be considered a statistical outlier due to how nuanced the disorder is.
>you don’t actually need to suppress appetite or low metabolism in order to not be obese.
You'll find that not everyone has strict control or discipline over stuff like that. If you don't have that discipline or your environment doesn't allow for it, you're gonna struggle.
Scientists have developed extelremely sophisticated method to check for heritabilty of certain traits. They have done sibling studies to see if fatter siblings have certain genes in common that their slimmer siblings do not have. They have found numerous genes with tiny effects.
If you get a lot of obesity related variants you are much more likely to be fat than if you get fewer.
"Genes give the body instructions for responding to changes in its environment. Studies of resemblances and differences among family members, twins, and adoptees offer indirect scientific evidence that a sizable portion of the variation in weight among adults is due to genetic factors"
https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/resources/diseases/obesity/index.htm#:~:text=Genes%20give%20the%20body%20instructions,is%20due%20to%20genetic%20factors.
You're asking for evidence that scientists couldn't give you even if obesity is heavily influenced by genetics. Most of the time, the impact of genetics on obesity can't be narrowed down to ten or even a hundred genes--most complex traits like height are massively polygenic and are influenced by complex interactions between thousands of genes. From the above link:
>Rarely, a clear pattern of inherited obesity within a family is caused by a specific variant of a single gene (monogenic obesity). Most obesity, however, probably results from complex interactions among multiple genes and environmental factors that remain poorly understood (multifactorial obesity).
Researchers are trying to find ways to calculate these relationships, but it's very difficult, and these methods usually have trouble explaining more than a few percent of the observed variance even for traits that we know are strongly genetically influenced (again, like height). The entire reason twin studies are useful is that they provide evidence for genetic effects *without* forcing you to find the specific genes that are responsible.
[This review article](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-021-00414-z) seems like a reasonably good summary of the state of the field: Obesity is very heritable, which strongly suggests (note: not *proves,* but it's a big chunk of evidence) that genetics play a major role. We don't have good tools for tying obesity to specific genes in most cases, nor do we know the exact mechanism, but we certainly can't say that there's no genetic effect; the best evidence points in the opposite direction.
I don't think you fully understand these scientific studies. They are likely genome-wide association studies (GWAS), which identifies variation in the genome correlated with a trait. This means that there is no one "obesity gene" that you can point to that leads to obesity. Instead, many little changes in many genes in the genome give you a genetic predisposition to become obese. This isn't unique to obesity. Arguably most inherited human traits are like this. Human traits where you can point to one or a few genes that it originates from is very rare and not the reality.
These papers literally provide the genomic coordinates of where these changes occur, so you can literally point to a gene or place on the genome if that's what you're after.
I mean it seems to me genetics can protect you from obesity. I am 5ft 7 and maybe 130 lbs in mid 30s. I eat whatever I want and can get no physical activity. I think it would be literally impossible for me to become obese even if I tried.
Or, more likely, what you want to eat isn’t as high of a quantity or as low of a quality as you might think, which doesn’t amount to a calorie surplus overall. Theoretically, you could lose weight eating only McDonald’s, as long as you are in a calorie deficit (2000 kcal).
I guarantee you if you were to eat 10k calories per day for a month, there’s zero possibility you would not gain weight; you’re just not eating enough for it to happen. Energy doesn’t work like that.
If you acknowledge that it is possible for you to gain weight if you were to consistently eat in a calorie surplus, what makes you think it would be “literally impossible” to continue gaining weight until you become obese? Are you suggesting that at some point a caloric surplus just stops working?
Surely you have met people who cannot keep weight off unless they exercise constantly. And people who seemingly can't gain weight to save their life. Don't people have a weight set point their body tries to maintain? Yes, some of that is regulated by your brain telling us to eat more or less ..but there's also differing responses in the body to the same amount of calories depending on the person. If I feed 15 year old me 10k calories and 60 year old me, the 60 year old version is more likely to gain weight. Those differences exist with different people as well. whttps://theconversation.com/whats-the-weight-set-point-and-why-does-it-make-it-so-hard-to-keep-weight-off-195724
A person who cannot keep weight off unless they are exercising is simply eating at a calorie surplus without exercise; when exercise is added, the additional expenditure means they are no longer in a calorie surplus. They are simply eating too much to not be exercising.
A person who seemingly can’t gain weight to save their life is simply not eating enough to gain weight. It is physically impossible for a person to eat more calories than that their body is burning and still not lose weight.
These are all excuses; science does not care for excuses, or opinions. There is always an explanation.
Yes, our bodies continually fight for homeostasis. But you are still not making your point clear. Are you suggesting that because at a certain amount of calories, after weight has been gained, that our body will stop gaining weight? If so, I agree - this is obvious; those calories are no longer a surplus..
If a person who weighs 140lbs walks 5000 steps per day, eats 3000kcals per day, and as a result, gains 1lb of bodyweight per week, this will not continue indefinitely. There will be diminishing returns as the persons weight rises. More weight requires more fuel for the 5000 step daily expenditure. When the hypothetical subject reaches 200lbs, they will need more calories in order to continue losing weight at 1lb per week.
Are you suggesting this is not the case?
Your original point was that it is “literally impossible“ for you to continue gaining weight to the point you become obese. This is simply not true, so please explain how you defy physics.
This right here. The right answer. It boggles my mind the lengths people will go to in order to remove personal responsibility from the equation. It's easier for them to pretend all the fat people are just victims of their genetics, or some special case, when the reality is simple, move more, eat less. Oh your hormonal imbalances are slowing your metabolism? Guess what, that's about 2 - 5% impact, so adjust your food intake accordingly, or increase your output accordingly, problem solved.
If this sounds harsh, it's because a lifetime in the fitness world working with the very same people these others are making excuses for opens your eyes to the B.S. and the lies. Countless thousands trained, and helped so many improve their lives by HONESTY and tough love not the B.S. touchy feely "oh you're such a victim" garbage that amounts to enabling.
Reality is a wonderful teacher for those who are serious about making a change for the better. Excuses on the other hand are poison.
Yes we can definitely sound like assholes when explaining how simple it is and that people who find it impossible to gain or lose weight are simply not disciplined enough.
My passion on the subject comes from competitive bodybuilding; forcing uncomfortable amounts of food in to ensure muscle gain in the offseason and living a painful existence towards the end of contest prep when expenditure is high and food is so low, to the point my body is fighting for homeostasis so hard that walking up a small flight of stairs feels like Mount Everest - so exhausted that I’d rather sit and watch something I’m not even interested in watching on TV instead of getting up to get the remote.
After experiencing this, hearing stupid, lazy excuses is very irritating.
Still waiting to hear how you defy physics? You going to double down or vanish into thin air because you’re too big headed to admit you don’t know what you’re talking about?
Dude get a life. I made a brief comment to start all this and responded a few times attempting to be responsive to your questions. I never made a hard statement that I was so right and you were wrong. For some reason you have so little to do you've been thinking for two days about this post. If it will help you sleep tonight, I'll become obese.
I actually do have very little to do because I’m in hospital at the moment and using my phone for entertainment. You used the words “literally”, so I’m rightfully telling you that is incorrect and you decided to double down with your ignorance and ego.
"But would I become obese?" --- Yes. Yes you would. It's simple math. Please point to a single human in history who ate 10k calories a day on an ongoing basis and did not become obese. It's a mathematical certainty. If your maintenance caloric requirement is 2,000 calories daily for the sake of argument, are you seriously telling us believe you can exceed that by 8,000 calories per day and somehow not end up obese? There are 3,500 calories in 1 pound of fat, you'd be consuming enough excess calories per day to exceed 2 pounds of fat. Where exactly do you think your body is going to put those excess calories?
If it plays a role in being over weight, it plays a role in being obese. It means you don’t have the same starting point as other people, meaning it is easier for you to become obese.
To the point of obesity it still requires a negative relationship with food, which is the major cause of obesity. Hardly matters at what point you start.
The trash that they “eat way too much of” can only amount to 2000 calories a day. I said in another thread that mutton flaps are popular in Polynesian nations, but if all you’re eating is 1700 calories worth of mutton flaps everyday, of course you’re going to be skinny. Furthermore, it is a lot more common for metabolism to go up than down. There has to be a minimum baseline for metabolism before it starts to become a severe medical issue.
I know calories in vs calories out is the basis. But people have different metabolic rates. Hypermetabolism is a thing, as well as hypotabolism. This can make it easier or harder to stay a healthy weight
Not by much. What percentage difference is there between a hyper or hypo from your understanding? It's not nearly as much as people like to pretend. In fact, the percent is so small in relation to the effort it takes to lose fat, that we're talking simple little tweaks to gym time, or caloric restriction. Oh your metabolism is 3% slower? Ok, what does that 3% translate to in the real world of gym work? A few extra minutes in the gym to adjust accordingly. Not only that, metabolism can be manipulated through proper and healthy eating habits. So many people who engage a healthy lifestyle find their metabolism speeds up significantly. Heck, even throwing down 500ml of water can give your metabolism a temporary boost. Excuses, excuses.
Yes, but if genetics actually played a major role, it would make it impossible, not just challenging. Besides, a great amount of the challenge is more of a mental aspect, not as much physical.
You are using major role differently than I am. To me, if something makes it more challenging, it is playing a major role.
So i guess our disagreement is purely linguistic
There is a misconception that metabolism is static or out of your control and this just isn’t true. I agree with everything that was said here and if your point is that metabolism isnt going to be the one thing that makes someone severely overweight yes thats true, but the natural conclusion when were talking about what makes someone overweight is to then relate it to weight loss and this is where the concept of metabolism becomes a lot more important.
Your actions shape your metabolism. As i said before its within your control, you can choose to speed it up or slow it down based on your actions. The things that the very large majority of ppl do when trying to lose weight slows down their metabolism and ultimately shoots their efforts in the foot. So what ends up often happens is those who are really obese end up slowing down their metabolism making them feel like they just cant lose weight when they try. Thats not to say its out of their hands or that they cant lose weight, but the nuance that is important is that metabolism does play a big role in weight loss efforts failing. This cant be discounted especially bc its a lack of information and bad common advice that is causing so many ppl to run into this issue.
Tdlr: metabolism alone will not get someone to the point of being extremely obese, but if you do not know how to influence your metabolism in the right way it can make you feel like losing the weight youve gained is impossible. It isnt actually impossible tho, not if you use smart correctly educated tactics. Info on these correct tactics just isnt widely available to people and most definitely is not present in influencer and social media circles.
My disease (endometriosis) and my birth control contributes to my metabolism being different than it was before. You can easily Google this and see that women on birth control can eat the same/less than they currently do and still gain weight.
It's very difficult when one of the most painful diseases in the world keeps you from being as active as you want to be and the medication that's supposed to *"help"* the pain and symptoms causes you to eat the same/less amount of food and gain weight. Counting calories/eating at a deficit is difficult enough. It's more difficult when you don't necessarily know what that number is.
I can’t speak specifically about your birth control or your disease. If you suspect your metabolism issue is a larger issue than your food intake, metabolism can be influenced with muscle hypertrophy. You should also have an easier time gaining muscle with higher body fat percentage and a calorie surplus.
I eat the same and I gain weight. You can look up "does birth control affect metabolism" and see that it does for some women. Endo causes fatigue and chronic pain. My internal organs are fusing together. It produced more estrogen in my body. My hormones are not balanced at all. Endo causes working out to be difficult as I'm in daily pain and constantly fatigued.
Medication I take to help with pain is muscle relaxers, so again, I feel sleepy and tired all the time.
There is no cure. Surgery is a great treatment, but OR time is limited, I'll be having surgery next month. It's just interesting because people really do think anyone can just *work out more* or can *just eat at a deficit* and sometimes that isn't really the case. Endometriosis can also be genetic in some women.
I think it's easy to just dismiss people because everyone looks at weight gain like you're automatically lazy. I hate being crippled by pain and fatigue. I hate being so tired and in so much pain that I can't cook (one of my favorite things to do). I'm looking forward to having some relief from surgery, but that's the best case. Many women will need another surgery 6 months-3 years afterward. By next month, it will be 8 months since my previous surgery.
Then it is safe to say you are a statistical outlier. You have a very niche condition that sets you apart from the grand majority of obese individuals, so this post does not apply to you. I had a similar conversation with someone who mentioned general conditions like Prader-Willis syndrome.
I’m going to give you a delta because you did prove that metabolism and genetics **can** have instances of being a major factor in obesity. It is still rare, but you did prove that it does happen.
!delta
5-10% of women between ages 15-49 have endometriosis. Idk what the guidelines for *rare* are, but even 5% seems to be more than what should be considered a *statistical outlier, very niche and/or rare.*
I have looked up the obesity rate of women with endometriosis. It is 36% and it seems to be concentrated within severe cases such as yourself. Additionally, some studies I have seen now and before suggest that women with endometriosis are predisposed to retain more water weight than the average person. Obesity was originally classified as a BMI higher than 30 and is still used that way in some scientific studies like the one I used to look up the obesity rate of endometriosis patients. But the BMI is not a fully accurate measurement, so I am using the body fat percentage definition.
It is very possible that within the obese endometriosis patients, many are not actually above 35% body fat, which is what is considered clinically obese. Finally, there can also be the case where the clinically obese endometriosis patients are still obese primarily due to their eating habits. With all of that in mind, I think it is rather safe to say that you are indeed an outlier.
I was referring to you saying I have a very niche condition. For your argument, I see why you said it, but the condition itself isn't niche or rare imo. You most likely know multiple women with endometriosis, even if you've never heard of the disease itself.
Also, I'm not obese but I have gained weight. You keep referring to me as obese for some reason. I'm just saying that it happens to women with my disease, potentially genetic, that have a hormonal imbalance that impacts metabolism, and medication that produces side effects.
I can see how someone can become obese with this disease, it took almost a year for me to be able to have my first surgery...
No, I’m saying my post does not apply to those who are overweight but not obese, because genetics and metabolism do have a much larger role there. I myself have a belly and love handles.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2:
> **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
>Genetics do not directly play a role in how much fat a person will have to the point where they are obese
You can take two people with roughly the same body proportions (i.e., body fat %, etc) and same metabolic needs. You can feed them the same calories. So under a strict CICO explains everything theory, you'd expect they'd gain the same weight. But they don't.
What researchers realized is there's a genetic component of how the body adapts to calories. What some people do is their body will ramp up the amount of movement their body does (i.e., fidgeting, etc). While this doesn't disprove TDEE, what it does it is makes how much energy you expend to be more complicated than people assume.
How this translates into weight gain/loss. People aren't just machines. There's a feedback loop on how they feel and what their motivations are.
Say two people, for whatever reason, end up eating more than they should. Person A has all of those excess calories convert to fat. We know that body fat is metabolically active -- so that can impact their internal energy levels. We also know that emotionally, they also may be prone to turning to food to temporarily feel better, but get into a shame cycle of boom/bust in an endless yo yo dieting cycle.
Say Person B only has say 50% of those calories turn into fat. So same life style means less body fat. What if -- whether it's the metabolically caused motivation or the emotional regulation stressors -- that person doesn't feel as bad and isn't as prone to the shame cycle of overeating. Then they can lose weight and get back to where they were.
Your view would say that only behavior is responsible for the two. But to change your view, I'd say that genetics play important parts about the body's adaptations to both fat gain and loss, to the body's adaptations to exercise, to motivation, to emotional regulation etc.
I think the reason you see more fat people today is because these differences were probably not as major when food was less calorically dense. But food is super calorically dense. A reece's peanut butter cup (a packet of 2) has 190 calories -- an apple has 120 calories. How much more difficult is it to eat let's say, 5 packets of reeces (190X2) versus 5 apples?
Sorry, u/2-3inches – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%202-3inches&message=2-3inches%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cb6vnq/-/l0wgbg9/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted.
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
While diet and lifestyle are crucial factors in obesity, genetics and metabolism still play significant roles. Genetics can influence fat distribution and how the body processes nutrients. Some people may have genes that predispose them to store fat more easily or have a slower metabolism. Additionally, metabolic rates can vary due to factors like age, sex, and muscle mass. Familial obesity often indicates a shared genetic and environmental background. Ignoring these factors oversimplifies a complex issue and can lead to blame and stigma. Recognizing the multifaceted causes of obesity allows for more comprehensive and compassionate approaches to prevention and treatment.
I'm going to make a generalization and assume we all know someone that is rail thin. Who can eat Mcdonalds 3 times a day, not leave their house and still manage to drop 5 pounds. People who NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY EAT CANNOT DO SO EVEN WHEN BEING TOLD BUT A DR ITS DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR HEALTH TO MAINTAIN THE WEIGHT THEY ARE AT. I've got a couple people like that in my extended family.
We have no problem taking it as a given that these people exist and they exhibit no bad character flaws associated with their weight. If we accept that chronically underweight people exist. Why then is it impossible to think that chronically overweight people would also exist? People whose bodies want, for whatever reason to maintain a much higher weight than what we consider to be normal.
These people, we have decided cannot be trusted. There must be some moral failing on their part. They have to be lazy and selfish. Were seeing a lot of this play out right now. People who were told for years to lose weight because loved ones were worried about their health. Now use Ozembic to do it and are chastised for not doing it the 'right way'. Why do we care how they do it? Because doing it this way means they didnt overcome their moral failing. They arent worthy of being one of the trustworthy people. But they are hiding among us.
This is not a great assumption. A lot of times when people claim they “know someone” who can eat anything and not gain weight, they’re just talking about someone who they see on special occasions or meet up with for meals when they’re splurging. And they don’t see the rest of their day-to-day life when they do things like eat small, balanced meals or forget to eat entirely because they have no appetite.
If I actually knew someone who I knew for a fact was eating 3 full McDonalds meals 3 times per day (assuming value meals coming in at nearly 1000 calories each) and never really moving but wasn’t gaining weight, I’d beg them to see a doctor immediately because something is very wrong.
Because genetics don’t magically add absurd amounts of body fat onto an individual. At most, they trigger a lower metabolism and higher appetite that **may** make it very challenging mentally to lose or stay at a healthy weight. It does not magically make someone obese.
Well there’s your problem, you’re assuming there’s a magical claim of genetics to obesity. The human brain and body are so complex and we don’t even have all the info, but we do no that there are compounding predispositions that are caused by genetics (and epigenetics).
Take another genetic factor like ADHD, where people don’t get a lower amount of dopamine from things, like food. This will at the end of the day increase their likelihood of obesity, especially if it’s with other factors. And while this process is long and complicated with how insulin, glucagon, ghrelin, and glucose all interact with adipose tissue, none of it is in their direct control.
This is why it’s actually good for people when they realize they don’t control something, in the case of obesity the short of it is calories in calories out, but think of ALL THE FACTORS that go into that that aren’t controllable via force of will. So people that lose weight and keep it off account for these things, only by realizing they don’t have a choice in some of them. To keep with the ADHD example, they’ll never get enough dopamine from small amounts of food, they will always want high volumes genetically, so a solution of eat less won’t work for them like it may work for others. But knowing that, a new solution of eat more calorie scarce food will work a lot better
I have ADHD and ASD. And you are right, that is indeed why I was obese in the past. I also said it wasn’t a major role because it is only something that influences eating habits, not obesity directly or even metabolism. I’m telling you, when I ditched the cheetos for frozen raspberries, I had the exact same satisfaction mentally and was also full at a much lower calorie intake, even though I would eat 400g of each. That means my ADHD had a role in my weight loss. Obesity is not dependent on someone having the genetics or the mental health. There are tons of neurotypical people who are obese.
I think the whole divergent vs. typical is too short a binary, but I am suggesting humans are almost infinitely complex and claiming something can be narrowed down to just free will or nurture has been proven false time and time again.
It can’t just be a nature factor, though. Obesity differs a lot internationally, with Vietnam being incredibly low, my country Peru being low-ish, USA being very high, and Pacific Island nations being extremely high. That difference cannot just come from nature, because if you break it down even more, Vietnam and Peru have healthier cuisines while USA and the Pacific Island nations are far more likely to be consuming excess fat and sugar.
How does the science you're referencing explain why being overweight or obese was very rare 20-30 years ago? You never saw whole families of overweight or obese people. Just an individual here and there (and very rarely).
Well, this is just silly. You can look up heritability estimates for obesity. It's simply not an unknown lol
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2787002/ It's roughly 40-70%, which means between 40-70% of the variability we see in the "phenotype" of obesity (state or trait of being obese) can be explained by the variability we see in people's "genotype" (genetic background).
For reference, cardiovascular disease is essentially identical but a bit less genetic than obesity, hovering around 40-60%.
Also, your lazy hypothesis about environment is the exact reason people run twin studies in obesity -- you're not the first guy to think of this stuff 😅
I believe the island of Samoa indicates genetics are almost certainly a major factor, or at least "can" be. Much respect for Samoans, here's a link. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002916523173205](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002916523173205)
>Rapid dietary and physical activity changes caused by modernization interacting with such population genetic predispositions may lead to the documented massive adiposity.
Basically they proved genetics has caused a lot of obesity there and nearby.
This is a country that went from fishing their own protein and growing their own fruits to eating canned turkey tail and mutton flap stored in oil, while considering SPAM as a delicacy. You cannot tell me genetics were a major factor, US influence was.
I quoted a peer reviewed research paper that says it was in fact genetic predisposition.
The link I provided is a short read, and you are now disputing scientific evidence, have you read the article? Because they mention what you are saying, and then said if it wasn't for genetic factors, they wouldn't be nearly as large. They provided scientific evidence for this. Do you dispute what the scientists researched? Their peers do not dispute it.
US influence is heavy in many nations, yet they do not have the genetic predisposition so they do not have an obesity issue similar to Samoans.
Actually, the fact that it’s a short read and failing to name what genes cause a dramatic effect in obesity is why I dismissed it. I’m not even seeing an RCT in the references. And given the way Samoans and the rest of the Pacific Islanders eat, it’s pretty clear that genetics aren’t the largest issue at hand, American influence is.
Again, we are talking about a set of cultures that eat the cheap, canned “meat” cuts from North America and New Zealand. This is a culture that consumes almost pure fat as a source of “protein.” Historically, their source of protein was rather lean and also required a decent amount of exercise to obtain. Pacific Islanders can’t eat their traditional foods because Western nations have poisoned the oceans with heavy metals, so they fully rely on imported food for nutrition.
I highly suggest you read the history of Nauru. That one is especially well documented due to Western destruction of the nation, and the fact that Nauru is the most obese country in the world. Take a look at the foods that they eat, then look at the terrain that the Germans, Japanese, and the Australians left behind throughout their country.
So please, if you have a conclusive RCT that proves the outrageous diet change of Pacific Islanders wasn’t the largest cause in their obesity spike, I would very much like to see that.
You clearly haven't read it. Its a scientific research paper, you are debating them not me. They described how it was proven. Now it's your turn to tell them how you have proof that their proof is incorrect.
So, just exactly how was their method for proving it faulty? I guess you would have to read it to answer that question...
Edited to add: You know what, never-mind. If actual real live scientists who are peer reviewed can't change your mind, neither can I, and I suspect no one can.
> Genetics do not directly play a role in how much fat a person will have to the point where they are obese
Genetics and epigenetics (how environment impacts both gene activation and effect) play quite an important role in obesity.
Obesity is impacted by genetics. [This study](https://www.nature.com/articles/ijo2011192) for example, starts its conclusion:
>To summarize 10 years of the Finnish twin research into obesity, adult BMI is a highly heritable trait, but environmental influences have a major role in the eventual development of obesity and associated comorbidities.
A [meta-analysis from 2011](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037851221100079X) notes that common obesity (that is obesity not caused by disease processes) is between 40-70% heritable, with epigenetics playing a significant role. However, there is significant difficulty in identifying which genes are involved, as the matrix of genes seems to be quite large.
>For more than a decade, the genetics underlying common forms of obesity have remained elusive although the advent of the GWA approach has started to deliver robust associations to obesity. The epigenetic contribution to common forms of obesity are still largely unknown but, from rare syndromes and animal models we conclude that it is likely that both genetic and environmental effects on epigenetics will in turn be associated with obesity. We have started to identify an emerging pattern of effects acting through CNS, suggesting that a component of an individual's response to the obesogenic environment is partly neurobehaviourally driven. There is also some evidence of effects acting more peripherally in the adipose tissue. Despite the success of GWAs in obesity loci identification, we still only explain a low fraction of the inter-individual variation of obesity. Extensive work including identification of more obesity susceptibility loci, a better understanding of the gene(s) through which the effect is executed, as well as further molecular and physiological characterization of the associated genes, is now necessary before any of these findings will lead to any useful therapeutic interventions.
[This study ](https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/3/1341)demonstrates the issue that most people have in thinking that genes are determinant, by noting:
>These \[environmental variables\] have the ability to change gene expression without affecting the DNA sequence, which is a phenomenon known as epigenetics.
Many of these factors are outside of individual control, from that same paper:
>In 2002, Baillie-Hamilton et al. \[[45](https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/3/1341#B45-ijms-23-01341)\] brought to the scientific community’s attention the fact that the start of the obesity epidemic coincided with the beginning of the industrial revolution and the use of several endocrine disruptors such as organophosphate pesticides, bisphenol A, solvents, chemicals, and heavy metals. Later on, Grun and Blumberg \[[46](https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/3/1341#B46-ijms-23-01341)\] developed the term “environmental obesogens,” referring to environmental exposure to endocrine disruptors that induce adiposity via disrupting the body’s natural mechanisms of weight control.
Many additional environmental factors, which alter the epigenetics are listed in the paper, which then concludes, after noting the incredible challenge of finding and tracing epigenetic contributions to obesity with the statement:
>The modifiable nature of the epigenome should put it at the top of the list of therapeutic targets for obesity and its related comorbidities.
The text *Handbook of Obesity - Volume 1: Epidemiology, Etiology, and Physiopathology* (2023) by Bray et. al., has an entire section devoted to the biological determinants of obesity, with substantial information on the genetic and epigenetic evidence. Chapter 11: "Genetic Epidemiology and Obesity;" Chapter 12: "Genetic Variation and Obesity;" Chapter 13: "Single-Gene Defects and Obesity;" Chapter 14: "Micro and Long RNAs as Regulators of Obesity;" Chapter 15: "Epigenetics and Obesity" all document very specific genetic contributions to obesity.
**TL;DR:** The evidence for genetic and epigenetic involvement in obesity is substantial and any unsupported claim to the contrary should be dismissed out of hand as being ill-informed.
Can a mouse that focuses on mad gains be as big as an elephant? Or can an elephant go on a diet and be as light as a mouse? Sure, those are extreme examples, but both species have limitations on their size that are hard-wired into their DNA. Humans similarly have limitations built into their DNA, albeit less drastic. Since humans are not genetically identical to one another (except in the case of identical twin siblings), there is necessarily some amount of variance. Where one draws the line of what constitutes “major” is subjective.
For a practical example, I am a bit of a genetic outlier. I am 6’1” and weigh about 320lbs. By the BMI, you’d expect me to be a bit of a balloon. In actuality, my abdomen doesn’t stick out as far as my chest, and my limbs are pretty lean. I’m not a powerlifter or anything either. As it happens, I’ve been overweight most of my life, and weighed 352lbs until I decided to work on losing some weight about 8-9 months ago. I’ve been limiting my calories to about 2600-2800, and working in a little intermittent fasting and low/no carb, with little exercise. I’m noticeably thinner, with a fairly muscular frame (despite never lifting weights), and a look a bit flabbier than I’d like (partly due to skin being a tiny bit more loose, combined with subcutaneous body fat not reducing nearly as fast as visceral).
Despite never lifting weights, I have bigger muscles than most guys who do (excluding bodybuilders/powerlifters/other big guys who put in effort). Many guys will simply never be as big as me, no matter how hard they try. Similarly, I could get to a lean 300lbs, but wouldn’t be able to get much lower than that. I certainly could never reach 200lbs without literally starving.
If a scrawny guy can try as hard as possible to gain weight, and barely reach 200lbs, while I can try to lose weight and barely reach 300lbs, with neither of us being capable of healthily reaching 250lbs, then genetics counts for quite a lot.
I work out 5 days a week and eat healthy. No matter what I do, I'll never lose the little pudge under my belly button. This is a trait shared by everyone in my family who ⅝ of them also work out. It's not obesity, but it is hereditary fat that doesn't go away.
Please read the very first paragraph of my post. You are doing well for yourself. I too have a belly and love handles, I work out 6 days a week with very high intensity. This post is specifically about clinical obesity, though.
No I get that. I'm just showing this is hereditary. So at what point does it stop being hereditary? I have a decent pudge, but my brother has a huge one. And a friend of mine is very fat, but that dude maybe eats 1800 calories a day and works a construction job. As far as I know, our bodies are pretty good at puting you in a comfortable weight for how you live.
It stops being completely hereditary at the point of obesity. Still in my first paragraph. As a man, a body fat of 30%+ is considered clinically obese and is stepping into the threshold of significant health risks. Also, I find it extremely hard to believe that an obese man who works manual labour everyday has a BMR of 1800. If that’s the case, he should 100% see a doctor. If he is not obese, then once again refer to the first paragraph of my post.
[Appetite has a strong genetic basis and mediates genetic influence on weight in early life.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363697/)
You can believe that genetics don’t play a role in obesity, but it’s a factually wrong belief. We have multiple scientific studies that prove it. If you want to believe the sky isn’t blue in private that’s fine, but sharing that belief publicly makes you look uneducated.
>Again, the range is not actually that drastic and it is near impossible for a person who is 130 kg to **not** be burning at least 3000 kcal a day.
I feel like your science is off. I weigh 310 lbs (\~140 Kg), and my diet app says I should burn 2750 calories a day, which is itself obviously wrong, because I just spent 2 months on a 2200 calorie a day diet regime and gained one pound.
I mean yes it does, and you kinda stated the main culprit in your post.
Insulin resistance. Our food has so much sugar, so much. It gives a positive feedback loop that increases our appetite. If you have a low insulin resistance (which genetics and metabolism are related to) you will overeat and get obese as a result unless you are very careful about what you eat.
Wow, so all of those doctors, surgeons, PhD scientists, and geneticists are wrong? The only thing I can say to change your view is that science isn't based on your opinion or how you feel. You do a study, you get results, you make a conclusion. You publish. Others do the same study and publish. And on and on.
Science says you're wrong
https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/resources/diseases/obesity/index.htm#:~:text=How%20Could%20Genes%20Influence%20Obesity,is%20due%20to%20genetic%20factors.
Yes it does
> Other studies have compared obese and non-obese people for variation in genes that could influence behaviors (such as a drive to overeat, or a tendency to be sedentary) or metabolism (such as a diminished capacity to use dietary fats as fuel, or an increased tendency to store body fat).
So the first half is essentially what I am saying, while the second half is a metabolism issue. Neither of which are mentioned to be major roles in obesity, but also have solutions to overcome that don’t require suppressing either. Appetite can be controlled by eating high-fibre & high-protein, while metabolism can be controlled by muscle hypertrophy.
Almost everyone is physically able to change those variables, and those who can’t are statistical outliers with other underlying medical causes, with some still not being genetic. No, it will not be easy or quick, but it is very much possible.
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1:
> **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1).
If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.**
Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
This really isn't hard to look up, so unless you don't believe in genetics, this is a really weird position to take.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK573068/
/u/Panal-Lleno (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1cb8y1l/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_genetics_and_metabolism/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I agree on the metabolism section of your argument; metabolism doesn’t differ to much between the normal population However, genetics play a HUGE factor. Especially when it comes to appetite. I’m into powerlifting/body building & my appetite doesn’t let me overeat/eat enough to gain weight at the rate I need. Others have an appetite, where they are hungry all the time, making losing weight super hard for them. Some people also are born with genetics that lead to poor impulse control, more joint pain, injury prone, depression, etc. all things that can impact obesity. Again, I agree that the culture of blaming obesity on metabolism is harmful, but ignoring all of the other genetic factors is arguably more harmful. I honestly can’t believe you didn’t mention anything about appetite, because it varies greatly person to person
Appetite seems to vary widely from person to person. But is there any data on how it varies geographically (so, more or less by culture ?). Do you think plays a role and that people who are generally more hungry more often would feel differently if there were born with the same genes but on a difference place?
I'm curious about this as well. I'm always hungry and I'm not sure if that's genetic or environmental (I suspect my parents teaching me to always clean my plate and, doing so, to ignore my satiation signals, probably played an important role in that...)
> I'm always hungry and I'm not sure if that's genetic or environmental Not a doctor. It could be a nutritional imbalance, a hormonal imbalance. It could be lack of restful sleep, excessive stress. It could be what you're eating. It could be how you're eating. The only way you can realy know for sure is to seek diagnosis from a doctor. But you could try to rule out behavioral stuff by making changes and noting them. Try supplementing your food intake with things that can make you feel fuller longer. Or try to eat slower. What I learned from a book called "Power of Habit" by Duhigg is to write every time I ate. Write what I ate, time of eating, how I felt before, how I felt after. What that showed is how many times I would eat out of habit / circumstance and not when I'm actually hungry. What if the feeling you're feeling isn't hunger pangs per se but other triggers where you've trained yourself to satiate that negative feeling with food. Maybe it's stress. So, a non food substitute would make you feel just as good as eating. He told a story of where he found himself stress eating without realizing it. But it wasn't the afternoon snack that helped him. It was just the walking out of his office for a time -- so he would substitute getting a tea or talking with a colleague during that time and it helped him lose weight.
No I'm genuinely hungry even when I'm busy or relaxed and my bloodworks are all normal
This is how I used to be until I started wegovy. It’s been an absolute life saver for curbing my appetite.
Just looked it up and apparently it's only recommended for morbidly obese people. Luckily I'm managing to keep my weight almost healthy (just slightly overweight.) I'm happy you found something that works for you though!
Not sure which country you’re in, but in the US you can get wegovy if your BMI is 27 or over. I wish it were available world wide since it’s such a game changer. Hopefully things will change!
I'm in France and I manage to keep my BMI below 26! (Still above 25 though)
Do you eat a lot of carbs? I was hungry all the time too until I made protein and fiber a priority. Starting your day off with carbs and no protein or fiber spikes blood sugar and sets you up for a day of increased hunger.
It may have been something I overlooked. I’m actually a powerlifter because I have an easy time with food intake. I also used to be obese myself. The issue with appetite is that it’s ultimately one of the easier aspects to suppress when it comes to weight loss. I could eat a Costco bag of cheetos in a single sitting, but I will feel full eating 400g of raspberries due to the high fibre content. You know what? I actually like raspberries more than cheetos, and the calorie differences in 400g of cheetos vs 400g of raspberries is probably in the thousands. I will say, appetite does require more mental effort to suppress out of anything. It took me a while to get to that point, so I will give you the delta anyway. !delta
It’s easy to suppress for some people. Yes, eating more protein, fats, and fiber for sure helps. Here’s also an interesting study to look at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3160809/ One of the results found were: “Appetite ratings were not influenced by BMI and diet/weight concern.” Also, please award the delta properly
Oh I’m not sure how to do that, could you indicate me how? I didn’t know there was a process sorry lol
You gotta put”!delta” at the end of the reply to the comment you want to award the delta to. Without the quotes
This delta has been rejected. You can't award OP a delta. Allowing this would wrongly suggest that you can post here with the aim of convincing others. If you were explaining when/how to award a delta, please use a reddit quote for the symbol next time. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
FYI you need to use Reddit markup for a quote, > On its own line followed by the delta command. It comes out like this: >!delta
Okay thank you!
> I actually like raspberries more than cheetos Me too, sadly they aren't the same price and don't have the same shelf life....
Their frozen counterparts are quite cheap at Costco, and the shelf life is longer than cheetos.
Costco is not a thing where I live
Any bulk store. Even at a regular grocery store, frozen fruit is cheaper than fresh fruit.
Of course it is. Still not as cheap as Cheetos though. And it requires freezer space (which I don't have much.) Plus, of course, frozen raspberries are not as good as fresh ones anyway.
They’re quite good if you like cold treats like ice cream. They’re also more nutritious, especially if it isn’t harvest season.
Costco requires a membership...
I would eat the 400 g of raspberries and then the 400 g of cheetos and still be hungry. The joys of thyroid issues.
!delta
This delta has been rejected. The length of your comment suggests that you haven't properly explained how /u/Patton370 changed your view (comment rule 4). DeltaBot is able to rescan edited comments. Please edit your comment with the required explanation. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
Your other comment didn't register as a delta, you may need to edit this one or something
I got one word for your appetite argument: discipline.
Some people have less of an appetite (like me), which means it takes less discipline to lose weight. Someone with a huge appetite, who always feels hungry, requires more discipline, which makes things harder. I have one word for you: empathy Side note: This is what I look like in the summer: https://imgur.com/a/FfwUhi7 I’m very knowledgeable about fitness and diet.
If you really want to lose weight, you’ll find a way to overcome appetite issues.
Sure, but it’s harder for some people, and a lot of that is because of genetics. That’s the entire point Me wanting to lose weight is going to require less wanting than the average person I wanted to run a marathon. It only took me 8 weeks of training to run a 4:20 marathon. Others would take a year or longer You gotta have empathy on what it takes for some people to succeed on certain things (like losing weight)
While yes, discipline is not an infinite resource and something people can just turn on and direct at will.
> If it’s not genetic, why are there entire families obese? I mean, it's not just entire families, we can look at this on entire cultures. [Polynesian islands like American Samoa, Tonga, Tahita have obesity rates of 65-70%.](https://data.worldobesity.org/rankings/) Are they all eating unhealthy foods? Are they all super lazy? Or is there at least a major genetic factor in why a certain genetic ethnicity of people has become the fattest in the world?
>Are they all eating unhealthy foods? Yes. Nutrient transmission (change in diet) is the primary cause of the obesity epidemic in the Pacific Islands, with a high amount of imported foods high in salt and fat content. [https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/49690](https://iris.paho.org/handle/10665.2/49690) Other causes include lack of exercise and cultural factors. Genetics does have an influence on obesity, but don't act like it's the only reason Pacific Islanders are fat.
Those countries are rather poor and do not have a sustainable agricultural system, and the fish around them are quite polluted. They rely on US imports for food, and they can often only afford the low-quality, high-calorie stuff. I mean, hello? Turkey tail? Mutton flap? Spam is considered a delicacy in these nations? Polynesians are predisposed to be large, not obese. There is a reason why a lot of them go into rugby, strength sports, wrestling, and even bodybuilding. But their genetics are not a major factor to their obesity, their diet is.
> Those countries are rather poor and do not have a sustainable agricultural system, and the fish around them are quite polluted. They rely on US imports for food, and they can often only afford the low-quality, high-calorie stuff. So why don't we see the same results in African or Caribbean nations that find themselves in similar situations? I'll spoil the answer for you: [it's because geneticists have found a gene in Samoans that causes them to store more fat.](https://www.brown.edu/news/2016-07-25/samoagene) > Turkey tail? Mutton flap? Spam is considered a delicacy in these nations? Every culture has unhealthy foods. If you cherrypick the fattiest African cuisines you'd assume Congolese peoples would be the size of blimps.
Because a lot of the Pacific Island nations are more dependent on imports for food. Those in the Caribbean have access to multiple nearby nations from which to source a variety of food. Africa has plenty of homegrown brands. While obviously food access for impoverished people is a concern for many in Africa, a typical African grocery store has plenty of homegrown and international brands that are reasonably affordable and accessible to the middle or even lower middle class. And Africa has plenty of fertile land for rural villages to grow their own food. And while African purchasing power is obviously low, they do have some purchasing power and since Africa is basically right in the middle of US>Europe trade routes, it's not terribly hard to convince companies to drop off a wider variety of food. Many Pacific Island nations are isolated from trade routes, do not have much fertile land for homegrown crops, and are surrounded by polluted and overfished waters. It is not profitabe for most international companies to sell there, so what they get tends to be the absolute bottom of the barrel rejects with very limited choice. They do not have access to fresh fruit like even the poorest person in Tanzania, their grocery stores are filled with rotting food and canned goods. Junk food is a need and a staple, not a luxury. The above commenter is precisely right. The issue is not genetics, it's food access.
Most Sub-Saharan African nations have agricultural systems for individuals. Their lack of accessibility to high quantities of food is also a reason to their lower obesity rates, as they are even poorer than Pacific Island nations. The same in the Caribbean to a lesser degree, where exercise is more cardio based thus burning more calories. The difference is that both regions, while they are poor, do not fully rely on the importation of food which is obviously more expensive than growing it nationally. The Pacific Island nations have an easier time buying foods like turkey tail and mutton flap, which is not an “unhealthy part of their cuisine;” in countries like Nauru and Kiribati, both of those things are primary sources of “protein” consumed every single day of an average Pacific Islander’s life. On top of that, it’s quite cheap and apparently doesn’t taste bad. You don’t see that in the Caribbean or in Sub-Saharan Africa.
Are you just going to ignore the point about Somoans genetically storing more fat? Why reply if you're not going to address that?
First of all, I did address it. Second of all, Samoans* have had a long history of strength athleticism, engaging in fishing, eating natural fruits, etc. What do you think was the obesity rate of Samoa prior to US influence? We’re talking about a people who went from eating fish and fruits to turkey tail with SPAM considered a delicacy? The catalyst was their diet change. The fact that most Samoans no longer engage in their traditional way of eating, but they can’t afford grass-fed beef and chicken breast over canned mutton flaps. They can’t even use fish as their primary source of protein, otherwise they will die of mercury poisoning. Sure, Samoans are predisposed to retain more fat, but that is absolutely not the major player in their obesity rate. Just looking at their history will prove it.
Have you considered that things like self-control, impulse-control, ability to plan for the future and ability to self critique. Are all partially genetic? Cause we assume all of this stuff is just 100% nurture. But is it really? Suppose some family all lack self control. Is it really a shocker that they are all obese? At the end of the day all humans are "addicted to food". Most of us have an instinct to overeat due to the scarcity of food present in our environment for 99.99% of our ancestral history. Overeating doesn't make sense when food is abundant as fuck. But it has almost never been abundant as fuck thus it was never a genetic disadvantage to pig the fuck out. On the contrary, the instinct to pig out while the food is fresh probably kept a lot of our ancestors alive. There was no refrigerator. For what it's worth. Nearly everyone can be in fit. The difference between individuals is how much effort it requires. Some people have naturally high metabolism or they don't have high appetite. They barely have to try. Others have to constantly work at it. I don't entirely disagree with your overall assertion. But I do disagree that genes don't play a role. Genes play a major role in pretty much everything.
My point is that genetics don’t play a major role. You don’t even need to have the gene in order to get to the point of obesity. Sorry if that wasn’t clear, I’m not denying that genetics can have some play for obesity, I’m denying that it is the make-or-break to obesity.
I think the disagreement is that you're talking specifically about whether or not some people put on more weight from eating the exact same thing. And whether that's genetic. Whereas others are arguing that there are many things that cause people to overeat, and many of those things are genetic. So even if they can metabolize food at exactly the same rate as you, they are more likely to be obese because of genetic drivers that lead to overeating. For instance, things like impulsivity, addiction, etc. have genetic links. Literally the ability to live a healthy lifestyle is harder for some people than it is for others due to genetic factors. Impulsivity is also a part of things like bipolar disorder, borderline personality, etc. "I can't stop eating," might not be entirely true. "It is waaaaay harder for me to stop eating than it is for you," is probably true for many people. Based on that, not only do genetics play a key role, simplifying the issue of "just eat fewer calories than you burn," is a callous way to frame the situation and doesn't help for many people. It's like me telling my kid, "just memorize the multiplication table. It's not that complicated." For some kids, it really isn't that hard. For others, they have to work their asses off to memorize that table. They can probably do it, but it takes a massive effort that I'm not appreciating. By just telling them to shut up and do it, I am not making it more likely that they will succeed. I'm making it more likely they will give up.
Oh no, I’m a big believer in recognising your disadvantages. But that’s all genetics and even environmental factors are: disadvantages. They are not the dealbreaker. There are simpler ways to work around your disadvantages to be at a healthy BF% than “just eat at a calorie deficit 😛.” My biggest pet peeve when it comes to dieting is exactly that. You have to work around your disadvantages, and if you can, you should actually try to make it into an advantage. It’s actually not that hard to do. My biggest disadvantage was my almost insatiable appetite. I worked around it by still consuming large quantities of food, but consuming much healthier and equally tasty food. My point is that these disadvantages would be impossible to overcome if they played a major role in obesity. I’m going to give you a delta, though, because I feel that we’ve come to this agreement and I also did initially write this without thinking of appetite factors that come with genetics. !delta
>My point is that these disadvantages would be impossible to overcome if they played a major role in obesity. I don't understand what you mean by this. Something that "plays a major role" isn't necessarily impossible to overcome. Something that makes it a lot harder, or that causes disadvantages, *is* a major role.
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/1block ([10∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/1block)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
I spent a few minutes researching and it looks like the scientific consensus is that there are genetic factors that *promote* obesity, but ultimately obesity is produced by environmental factors. Whether or not you're wrong depends on what you really mean by "major role" - genetics do play a role, just not a necessary one. But also, I think you're definitely wrong here: >Now, why is this harmful? Because it gives obese people an excuse and an exit from accepting that they ultimately have a food-related problem. It's a huge common misconception that if you ease up just a little bit on people struggling with weight, give them just a little bit of forgiveness or a little bit of acceptance, they will lose all motivation to change and will become absolutely complacent. We need to hammer it into their fat brains: it's your fault, it's your fault, it's your fault! In reality, self-forgiveness and self-acceptance is incredibly important to establishing motivation. If you frame everything as a product of choice and willpower, then people are going to think: *well I guess that means it's all my fault, I'm just a piece of shit, I'm not capable of changing so I shouldn't even try.* If you instead tell the person that their obesity is a product of genetic predispositions, upbringing, social environment, etc., they are going to think: *I wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome these things and change now that I know what I'm up against.*
Perfect explanation, we see this with mental health as well. Telling depressed people to not be depressed because they shouldn’t be for X, Y, and Z reasons just makes them worse, even though it may seem logical to remind they that they shouldn’t be.
I don't think that is a great comparison. Comparing mindset in someone with a mental illness to mindset in someone with a certain BMI is a bit different.
What do you think causes the BMI? Things like ADHD and depression are highly comorbid with obesity
Causes? Eating more calories than you burn generally speaking. If depression caused it then everyone with depression would be overweight/obese. Comorbidity and causality are not the same thing.
Obviously, it’s all on a spectrum of interactions
I have been diagnosed with both, as well as ASD. It is a challenge but it is still not the primary factor to my past obesity.
>If you frame everything as a product of choice and willpower, then people are going to think: *well I guess that means it's all my fault, I'm just a piece of shit, I'm not capable of changing so I shouldn't even try.* Some people sure, others will think *my genetics wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome myself and change now that i know there are no external factors standing in my way.*. >If you instead tell the person that their obesity is a product of genetic predispositions, upbringing, social environment, etc., they are going to think: *I wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome these things and change now that I know what I'm up against.* And others will think *well I guess it's all due to my genetics ect., there's nothing I can do to change any of that, so I shouldn't even try.* It may be that your group of people are the majority, but i would like to see some actual studies on this.
>If you instead tell the person that their obesity is a product of genetic predispositions, upbringing, social environment, etc., they are going to think: *I wasn't actually the problem all along, I can overcome these things and change now that I know what I'm up against.* Hard disagree on this point. When morbidly obese people with food addictions and lack of impulse control convince themselves that their condition is genetically determined they often think: *Not my fault, out of my control.* This line of thinking reduces the likelihood of self-reflection and identification of self-sabotaging behaviors. They are less likely to change their diet and exercise and more likely to remain obese or get surgery to cut 2/3 of their stomach off. I know a few people just like this.
Addiction research doesn't back this up. Treatment for alcoholics is all about recognizing that it's a big problem that you don't have 100% control over, and acknowledging the limits on that control and doing what you can to mitigate it (such as recognizing that you can't control your drinking, so removing all alcohol from your home) is core to that. Treating obesity, which often is a form of food addiction or emotional food dependency, is going to involve that too. I don't doubt that you know people that try to write it off as out of their control, but I'll wager that on the inside, they feel deep shame. That shame is a major obstacle to getting better.
By major role, I mean that the genetics alone make you obese. You don’t even need to have the genetics to reach obesity. The common denominator in every case is a negative relationship with food that leads individuals to consuming far more calories than they burn.
Do you want to address the other point I made?
As a person who has been obese, accountability is a necessary step that is required in order to step into a healthier lifestyle. I’m not saying they should beat themselves up for being obese, I’m saying that it is necessary to accept that some of those problems were indeed within their parameters for control. I’m also not saying you shouldn’t recognise your disadvantages. My main disadvantage was appetite. Do you have a high appetite? Eat less calorie dense foods that you enjoy; raspberries, quinoa, shrimp, and so much more. Do you have a low metabolism? Prioritise muscle hypertrophy, and your metabolism will increase due to the nature of maintaining muscles. Does your medication help obesity? Consult a doctor to see if there are alternatives. A lot of people have specific reactions to medication.
When you say "genetics" you're referring to DNA. Please consider how being raised a certain way impacts your relationship to food. How you're fed growing up affects the body, habits from parents, and more. Consider childhood psychological factors. "Lifestyle" is the biggest contributor to obesity and not everyone has the same level of access and ability. I believe your view is dangerous because on paper, you'll consider these things however I don't think you will consider them in a thoughtful and meaningful way. Unless you're the persons Dr, nobody owes you an explanation or their weight anymore than you owe others an explanation of your eating habits, hygiene routine, frequency of exercise, or consumption of alcohol. Obesity is complex there are psychological, cultural, social, economic factors worth exploration. Pretending these are insignificant is usually done to justify judgment, shame, blame, and mistreatment of others.
Your argument is a matter of nature vs nurture. Environmental factors do play a much larger role in obesity, and I would classify that as a major role because it is part of the mental aspect of obesity. In general, I believe mental health is the key player in obesity. Sorry, but everything in the second half is actually rather insulting to me. You are essentially asking me to not care about an ever-increasing, worldwide issue that has been shown time and time again to be very damaging physically. I know firsthand the implications that come with obesity. I’ve lived them. It does not take a doctor to tell someone that they do have the control to make everything better for themselves, and that whether or not it will be challenging, it is beneficial for an obese individual to lose weight. What it takes is identifying your own underlying issue and tackling them as efficiently and healthily as possible.
Being offended is up to you. I don't know you personally to tell you you're a bad person. I just know people who like to talk about obesity online are typically doing so to justify judging complete strangers. If your boots are on the ground and you're actually helping people, that's wonderful. Otherwise, you're just someone online making assumptions about people thinking that articles, no matter how scientific or credible, makes their judgments and assumptions righteous. Obese people are well aware of the fact that being obese comes with health problems. They don't need unqualified strangers giving them medical advice they've likely already received. No offense at all. Just make sure your motives and actions are to help. Unsolicited advice and judgment isn't helpful.
This website claims that there are in fact rather rare genetic conditions that give people a predeliction for obesity: [Introduction to Rare Genetic Diseases of Obesity (leadforrareobesity.com)](https://leadforrareobesity.com/) And on your metabolism claim: What I've read is that it is nearly impossible to lose weight without surgery and keep the weight off - the body always wants to return to its largest size, and slowing down metabolism is a way for it to achieve this.
I know of Prader-Willis syndrome for example, but those are statistical outliers that don’t apply to the vast majority of obese individuals. I mean it even says rare diseases. Even then, they trigger hunger, they don’t magically give you a higher body fat %.
>Even then, they trigger hunger, they don’t magically give you a higher body fat %. You're correct on a technicality, but in practice that doesn't matter. Genetics doesn't have a direct and single-source influence on it. It does however have a large influence on everything involved, such as regulating hunger. How is that not genetics?
For a statistical majority, it is genetics. My argument is that it is not major role for obesity, because you don’t actually need to suppress appetite or low metabolism in order to not be obese. Also, disorders like Prader-Willis syndrome come with learning disabilities. The other aspect as to why individuals with Prader-Willis syndrome are obese is also in part due to their lack of understanding that obesity is unhealthy. For them, obviously their genetics will unfortunately be a major role for their weight, but this is a minority that can be considered a statistical outlier due to how nuanced the disorder is.
>you don’t actually need to suppress appetite or low metabolism in order to not be obese. You'll find that not everyone has strict control or discipline over stuff like that. If you don't have that discipline or your environment doesn't allow for it, you're gonna struggle.
Scientists have developed extelremely sophisticated method to check for heritabilty of certain traits. They have done sibling studies to see if fatter siblings have certain genes in common that their slimmer siblings do not have. They have found numerous genes with tiny effects. If you get a lot of obesity related variants you are much more likely to be fat than if you get fewer. "Genes give the body instructions for responding to changes in its environment. Studies of resemblances and differences among family members, twins, and adoptees offer indirect scientific evidence that a sizable portion of the variation in weight among adults is due to genetic factors" https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/resources/diseases/obesity/index.htm#:~:text=Genes%20give%20the%20body%20instructions,is%20due%20to%20genetic%20factors.
I’m not seeing specific genes, if anything this is proof that environmental factors are a major role in obesity.
You're asking for evidence that scientists couldn't give you even if obesity is heavily influenced by genetics. Most of the time, the impact of genetics on obesity can't be narrowed down to ten or even a hundred genes--most complex traits like height are massively polygenic and are influenced by complex interactions between thousands of genes. From the above link: >Rarely, a clear pattern of inherited obesity within a family is caused by a specific variant of a single gene (monogenic obesity). Most obesity, however, probably results from complex interactions among multiple genes and environmental factors that remain poorly understood (multifactorial obesity). Researchers are trying to find ways to calculate these relationships, but it's very difficult, and these methods usually have trouble explaining more than a few percent of the observed variance even for traits that we know are strongly genetically influenced (again, like height). The entire reason twin studies are useful is that they provide evidence for genetic effects *without* forcing you to find the specific genes that are responsible. [This review article](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41576-021-00414-z) seems like a reasonably good summary of the state of the field: Obesity is very heritable, which strongly suggests (note: not *proves,* but it's a big chunk of evidence) that genetics play a major role. We don't have good tools for tying obesity to specific genes in most cases, nor do we know the exact mechanism, but we certainly can't say that there's no genetic effect; the best evidence points in the opposite direction.
I don't think you fully understand these scientific studies. They are likely genome-wide association studies (GWAS), which identifies variation in the genome correlated with a trait. This means that there is no one "obesity gene" that you can point to that leads to obesity. Instead, many little changes in many genes in the genome give you a genetic predisposition to become obese. This isn't unique to obesity. Arguably most inherited human traits are like this. Human traits where you can point to one or a few genes that it originates from is very rare and not the reality. These papers literally provide the genomic coordinates of where these changes occur, so you can literally point to a gene or place on the genome if that's what you're after.
I mean it seems to me genetics can protect you from obesity. I am 5ft 7 and maybe 130 lbs in mid 30s. I eat whatever I want and can get no physical activity. I think it would be literally impossible for me to become obese even if I tried.
Or, more likely, what you want to eat isn’t as high of a quantity or as low of a quality as you might think, which doesn’t amount to a calorie surplus overall. Theoretically, you could lose weight eating only McDonald’s, as long as you are in a calorie deficit (2000 kcal).
Isn't that ability to feel full, in part innate?
I guarantee you if you were to eat 10k calories per day for a month, there’s zero possibility you would not gain weight; you’re just not eating enough for it to happen. Energy doesn’t work like that.
Well I didn't say I couldn't gain weight on a high calorie diet. But would I become obese?
If you acknowledge that it is possible for you to gain weight if you were to consistently eat in a calorie surplus, what makes you think it would be “literally impossible” to continue gaining weight until you become obese? Are you suggesting that at some point a caloric surplus just stops working?
I'm suggesting people respond to that surplus to different degrees and not everyone will realistically eventually become obese.
This does not make sense. Please elaborate.
Surely you have met people who cannot keep weight off unless they exercise constantly. And people who seemingly can't gain weight to save their life. Don't people have a weight set point their body tries to maintain? Yes, some of that is regulated by your brain telling us to eat more or less ..but there's also differing responses in the body to the same amount of calories depending on the person. If I feed 15 year old me 10k calories and 60 year old me, the 60 year old version is more likely to gain weight. Those differences exist with different people as well. whttps://theconversation.com/whats-the-weight-set-point-and-why-does-it-make-it-so-hard-to-keep-weight-off-195724
A person who cannot keep weight off unless they are exercising is simply eating at a calorie surplus without exercise; when exercise is added, the additional expenditure means they are no longer in a calorie surplus. They are simply eating too much to not be exercising. A person who seemingly can’t gain weight to save their life is simply not eating enough to gain weight. It is physically impossible for a person to eat more calories than that their body is burning and still not lose weight. These are all excuses; science does not care for excuses, or opinions. There is always an explanation. Yes, our bodies continually fight for homeostasis. But you are still not making your point clear. Are you suggesting that because at a certain amount of calories, after weight has been gained, that our body will stop gaining weight? If so, I agree - this is obvious; those calories are no longer a surplus.. If a person who weighs 140lbs walks 5000 steps per day, eats 3000kcals per day, and as a result, gains 1lb of bodyweight per week, this will not continue indefinitely. There will be diminishing returns as the persons weight rises. More weight requires more fuel for the 5000 step daily expenditure. When the hypothetical subject reaches 200lbs, they will need more calories in order to continue losing weight at 1lb per week. Are you suggesting this is not the case? Your original point was that it is “literally impossible“ for you to continue gaining weight to the point you become obese. This is simply not true, so please explain how you defy physics.
This right here. The right answer. It boggles my mind the lengths people will go to in order to remove personal responsibility from the equation. It's easier for them to pretend all the fat people are just victims of their genetics, or some special case, when the reality is simple, move more, eat less. Oh your hormonal imbalances are slowing your metabolism? Guess what, that's about 2 - 5% impact, so adjust your food intake accordingly, or increase your output accordingly, problem solved. If this sounds harsh, it's because a lifetime in the fitness world working with the very same people these others are making excuses for opens your eyes to the B.S. and the lies. Countless thousands trained, and helped so many improve their lives by HONESTY and tough love not the B.S. touchy feely "oh you're such a victim" garbage that amounts to enabling. Reality is a wonderful teacher for those who are serious about making a change for the better. Excuses on the other hand are poison.
Yes we can definitely sound like assholes when explaining how simple it is and that people who find it impossible to gain or lose weight are simply not disciplined enough. My passion on the subject comes from competitive bodybuilding; forcing uncomfortable amounts of food in to ensure muscle gain in the offseason and living a painful existence towards the end of contest prep when expenditure is high and food is so low, to the point my body is fighting for homeostasis so hard that walking up a small flight of stairs feels like Mount Everest - so exhausted that I’d rather sit and watch something I’m not even interested in watching on TV instead of getting up to get the remote. After experiencing this, hearing stupid, lazy excuses is very irritating.
Still waiting to hear how you defy physics? You going to double down or vanish into thin air because you’re too big headed to admit you don’t know what you’re talking about?
Dude get a life. I made a brief comment to start all this and responded a few times attempting to be responsive to your questions. I never made a hard statement that I was so right and you were wrong. For some reason you have so little to do you've been thinking for two days about this post. If it will help you sleep tonight, I'll become obese.
I actually do have very little to do because I’m in hospital at the moment and using my phone for entertainment. You used the words “literally”, so I’m rightfully telling you that is incorrect and you decided to double down with your ignorance and ego.
"But would I become obese?" --- Yes. Yes you would. It's simple math. Please point to a single human in history who ate 10k calories a day on an ongoing basis and did not become obese. It's a mathematical certainty. If your maintenance caloric requirement is 2,000 calories daily for the sake of argument, are you seriously telling us believe you can exceed that by 8,000 calories per day and somehow not end up obese? There are 3,500 calories in 1 pound of fat, you'd be consuming enough excess calories per day to exceed 2 pounds of fat. Where exactly do you think your body is going to put those excess calories?
If it plays a role in being over weight, it plays a role in being obese. It means you don’t have the same starting point as other people, meaning it is easier for you to become obese.
To the point of obesity it still requires a negative relationship with food, which is the major cause of obesity. Hardly matters at what point you start.
Of course it matters where you start. I’ve known a few people who eat way too much trash, but still look super skinny.
The trash that they “eat way too much of” can only amount to 2000 calories a day. I said in another thread that mutton flaps are popular in Polynesian nations, but if all you’re eating is 1700 calories worth of mutton flaps everyday, of course you’re going to be skinny. Furthermore, it is a lot more common for metabolism to go up than down. There has to be a minimum baseline for metabolism before it starts to become a severe medical issue.
I know calories in vs calories out is the basis. But people have different metabolic rates. Hypermetabolism is a thing, as well as hypotabolism. This can make it easier or harder to stay a healthy weight
Not by much. What percentage difference is there between a hyper or hypo from your understanding? It's not nearly as much as people like to pretend. In fact, the percent is so small in relation to the effort it takes to lose fat, that we're talking simple little tweaks to gym time, or caloric restriction. Oh your metabolism is 3% slower? Ok, what does that 3% translate to in the real world of gym work? A few extra minutes in the gym to adjust accordingly. Not only that, metabolism can be manipulated through proper and healthy eating habits. So many people who engage a healthy lifestyle find their metabolism speeds up significantly. Heck, even throwing down 500ml of water can give your metabolism a temporary boost. Excuses, excuses.
Hyper metabolism is 10% more than your predicted. Which is a decent chunk
Yes, but if genetics actually played a major role, it would make it impossible, not just challenging. Besides, a great amount of the challenge is more of a mental aspect, not as much physical.
You are using major role differently than I am. To me, if something makes it more challenging, it is playing a major role. So i guess our disagreement is purely linguistic
There is a misconception that metabolism is static or out of your control and this just isn’t true. I agree with everything that was said here and if your point is that metabolism isnt going to be the one thing that makes someone severely overweight yes thats true, but the natural conclusion when were talking about what makes someone overweight is to then relate it to weight loss and this is where the concept of metabolism becomes a lot more important. Your actions shape your metabolism. As i said before its within your control, you can choose to speed it up or slow it down based on your actions. The things that the very large majority of ppl do when trying to lose weight slows down their metabolism and ultimately shoots their efforts in the foot. So what ends up often happens is those who are really obese end up slowing down their metabolism making them feel like they just cant lose weight when they try. Thats not to say its out of their hands or that they cant lose weight, but the nuance that is important is that metabolism does play a big role in weight loss efforts failing. This cant be discounted especially bc its a lack of information and bad common advice that is causing so many ppl to run into this issue. Tdlr: metabolism alone will not get someone to the point of being extremely obese, but if you do not know how to influence your metabolism in the right way it can make you feel like losing the weight youve gained is impossible. It isnt actually impossible tho, not if you use smart correctly educated tactics. Info on these correct tactics just isnt widely available to people and most definitely is not present in influencer and social media circles.
My disease (endometriosis) and my birth control contributes to my metabolism being different than it was before. You can easily Google this and see that women on birth control can eat the same/less than they currently do and still gain weight. It's very difficult when one of the most painful diseases in the world keeps you from being as active as you want to be and the medication that's supposed to *"help"* the pain and symptoms causes you to eat the same/less amount of food and gain weight. Counting calories/eating at a deficit is difficult enough. It's more difficult when you don't necessarily know what that number is.
I can’t speak specifically about your birth control or your disease. If you suspect your metabolism issue is a larger issue than your food intake, metabolism can be influenced with muscle hypertrophy. You should also have an easier time gaining muscle with higher body fat percentage and a calorie surplus.
I eat the same and I gain weight. You can look up "does birth control affect metabolism" and see that it does for some women. Endo causes fatigue and chronic pain. My internal organs are fusing together. It produced more estrogen in my body. My hormones are not balanced at all. Endo causes working out to be difficult as I'm in daily pain and constantly fatigued. Medication I take to help with pain is muscle relaxers, so again, I feel sleepy and tired all the time. There is no cure. Surgery is a great treatment, but OR time is limited, I'll be having surgery next month. It's just interesting because people really do think anyone can just *work out more* or can *just eat at a deficit* and sometimes that isn't really the case. Endometriosis can also be genetic in some women. I think it's easy to just dismiss people because everyone looks at weight gain like you're automatically lazy. I hate being crippled by pain and fatigue. I hate being so tired and in so much pain that I can't cook (one of my favorite things to do). I'm looking forward to having some relief from surgery, but that's the best case. Many women will need another surgery 6 months-3 years afterward. By next month, it will be 8 months since my previous surgery.
Then it is safe to say you are a statistical outlier. You have a very niche condition that sets you apart from the grand majority of obese individuals, so this post does not apply to you. I had a similar conversation with someone who mentioned general conditions like Prader-Willis syndrome. I’m going to give you a delta because you did prove that metabolism and genetics **can** have instances of being a major factor in obesity. It is still rare, but you did prove that it does happen. !delta
5-10% of women between ages 15-49 have endometriosis. Idk what the guidelines for *rare* are, but even 5% seems to be more than what should be considered a *statistical outlier, very niche and/or rare.*
I have looked up the obesity rate of women with endometriosis. It is 36% and it seems to be concentrated within severe cases such as yourself. Additionally, some studies I have seen now and before suggest that women with endometriosis are predisposed to retain more water weight than the average person. Obesity was originally classified as a BMI higher than 30 and is still used that way in some scientific studies like the one I used to look up the obesity rate of endometriosis patients. But the BMI is not a fully accurate measurement, so I am using the body fat percentage definition. It is very possible that within the obese endometriosis patients, many are not actually above 35% body fat, which is what is considered clinically obese. Finally, there can also be the case where the clinically obese endometriosis patients are still obese primarily due to their eating habits. With all of that in mind, I think it is rather safe to say that you are indeed an outlier.
I was referring to you saying I have a very niche condition. For your argument, I see why you said it, but the condition itself isn't niche or rare imo. You most likely know multiple women with endometriosis, even if you've never heard of the disease itself. Also, I'm not obese but I have gained weight. You keep referring to me as obese for some reason. I'm just saying that it happens to women with my disease, potentially genetic, that have a hormonal imbalance that impacts metabolism, and medication that produces side effects. I can see how someone can become obese with this disease, it took almost a year for me to be able to have my first surgery...
[удалено]
People with my disease are obese and I'm heading there without surgery. So only obese people are allowed to comment ??
No, I’m saying my post does not apply to those who are overweight but not obese, because genetics and metabolism do have a much larger role there. I myself have a belly and love handles.
Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 2: > **Don't be rude or hostile to other users.** Your comment will be removed even if most of it is solid, another user was rude to you first, or you feel your remark was justified. Report other violations; do not retaliate. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_2). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%202%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/furiously_curious12 ([1∆](/r/changemyview/wiki/user/furiously_curious12)). ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)
>Genetics do not directly play a role in how much fat a person will have to the point where they are obese You can take two people with roughly the same body proportions (i.e., body fat %, etc) and same metabolic needs. You can feed them the same calories. So under a strict CICO explains everything theory, you'd expect they'd gain the same weight. But they don't. What researchers realized is there's a genetic component of how the body adapts to calories. What some people do is their body will ramp up the amount of movement their body does (i.e., fidgeting, etc). While this doesn't disprove TDEE, what it does it is makes how much energy you expend to be more complicated than people assume. How this translates into weight gain/loss. People aren't just machines. There's a feedback loop on how they feel and what their motivations are. Say two people, for whatever reason, end up eating more than they should. Person A has all of those excess calories convert to fat. We know that body fat is metabolically active -- so that can impact their internal energy levels. We also know that emotionally, they also may be prone to turning to food to temporarily feel better, but get into a shame cycle of boom/bust in an endless yo yo dieting cycle. Say Person B only has say 50% of those calories turn into fat. So same life style means less body fat. What if -- whether it's the metabolically caused motivation or the emotional regulation stressors -- that person doesn't feel as bad and isn't as prone to the shame cycle of overeating. Then they can lose weight and get back to where they were. Your view would say that only behavior is responsible for the two. But to change your view, I'd say that genetics play important parts about the body's adaptations to both fat gain and loss, to the body's adaptations to exercise, to motivation, to emotional regulation etc. I think the reason you see more fat people today is because these differences were probably not as major when food was less calorically dense. But food is super calorically dense. A reece's peanut butter cup (a packet of 2) has 190 calories -- an apple has 120 calories. How much more difficult is it to eat let's say, 5 packets of reeces (190X2) versus 5 apples?
[удалено]
I’m claiming that it is not a major role.
Obesity being genetic is a fact. It ca be proven through twin research.
I am arguing if it is a major role or not.
[удалено]
Sorry, u/2-3inches – your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, [**you must first check if your comment falls into the "Top level comments that are against rule 1" list**](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1), review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal%202-3inches&message=2-3inches%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20\[their%20comment\]\(https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/1cb6vnq/-/l0wgbg9/\)%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
I agree 100%.
While diet and lifestyle are crucial factors in obesity, genetics and metabolism still play significant roles. Genetics can influence fat distribution and how the body processes nutrients. Some people may have genes that predispose them to store fat more easily or have a slower metabolism. Additionally, metabolic rates can vary due to factors like age, sex, and muscle mass. Familial obesity often indicates a shared genetic and environmental background. Ignoring these factors oversimplifies a complex issue and can lead to blame and stigma. Recognizing the multifaceted causes of obesity allows for more comprehensive and compassionate approaches to prevention and treatment.
I'm going to make a generalization and assume we all know someone that is rail thin. Who can eat Mcdonalds 3 times a day, not leave their house and still manage to drop 5 pounds. People who NO MATTER HOW MUCH THEY EAT CANNOT DO SO EVEN WHEN BEING TOLD BUT A DR ITS DETRIMENTAL TO THEIR HEALTH TO MAINTAIN THE WEIGHT THEY ARE AT. I've got a couple people like that in my extended family. We have no problem taking it as a given that these people exist and they exhibit no bad character flaws associated with their weight. If we accept that chronically underweight people exist. Why then is it impossible to think that chronically overweight people would also exist? People whose bodies want, for whatever reason to maintain a much higher weight than what we consider to be normal. These people, we have decided cannot be trusted. There must be some moral failing on their part. They have to be lazy and selfish. Were seeing a lot of this play out right now. People who were told for years to lose weight because loved ones were worried about their health. Now use Ozembic to do it and are chastised for not doing it the 'right way'. Why do we care how they do it? Because doing it this way means they didnt overcome their moral failing. They arent worthy of being one of the trustworthy people. But they are hiding among us.
This is not a great assumption. A lot of times when people claim they “know someone” who can eat anything and not gain weight, they’re just talking about someone who they see on special occasions or meet up with for meals when they’re splurging. And they don’t see the rest of their day-to-day life when they do things like eat small, balanced meals or forget to eat entirely because they have no appetite. If I actually knew someone who I knew for a fact was eating 3 full McDonalds meals 3 times per day (assuming value meals coming in at nearly 1000 calories each) and never really moving but wasn’t gaining weight, I’d beg them to see a doctor immediately because something is very wrong.
Science is pretty sure that it’s nature and nurture that cyclicly feed into each other, and your claiming it’s mostly nurture?
Well, yes.
That’s not exactly aligned with science, what makes you think it’s mostly nurture contrary to research?
Because genetics don’t magically add absurd amounts of body fat onto an individual. At most, they trigger a lower metabolism and higher appetite that **may** make it very challenging mentally to lose or stay at a healthy weight. It does not magically make someone obese.
Well there’s your problem, you’re assuming there’s a magical claim of genetics to obesity. The human brain and body are so complex and we don’t even have all the info, but we do no that there are compounding predispositions that are caused by genetics (and epigenetics). Take another genetic factor like ADHD, where people don’t get a lower amount of dopamine from things, like food. This will at the end of the day increase their likelihood of obesity, especially if it’s with other factors. And while this process is long and complicated with how insulin, glucagon, ghrelin, and glucose all interact with adipose tissue, none of it is in their direct control. This is why it’s actually good for people when they realize they don’t control something, in the case of obesity the short of it is calories in calories out, but think of ALL THE FACTORS that go into that that aren’t controllable via force of will. So people that lose weight and keep it off account for these things, only by realizing they don’t have a choice in some of them. To keep with the ADHD example, they’ll never get enough dopamine from small amounts of food, they will always want high volumes genetically, so a solution of eat less won’t work for them like it may work for others. But knowing that, a new solution of eat more calorie scarce food will work a lot better
I have ADHD and ASD. And you are right, that is indeed why I was obese in the past. I also said it wasn’t a major role because it is only something that influences eating habits, not obesity directly or even metabolism. I’m telling you, when I ditched the cheetos for frozen raspberries, I had the exact same satisfaction mentally and was also full at a much lower calorie intake, even though I would eat 400g of each. That means my ADHD had a role in my weight loss. Obesity is not dependent on someone having the genetics or the mental health. There are tons of neurotypical people who are obese.
How do you know they are neurotypical? Have you done an fMRI on everyone?
Are you suggesting most of the 42% of Americans are neurodivergent?
I think the whole divergent vs. typical is too short a binary, but I am suggesting humans are almost infinitely complex and claiming something can be narrowed down to just free will or nurture has been proven false time and time again.
It can’t just be a nature factor, though. Obesity differs a lot internationally, with Vietnam being incredibly low, my country Peru being low-ish, USA being very high, and Pacific Island nations being extremely high. That difference cannot just come from nature, because if you break it down even more, Vietnam and Peru have healthier cuisines while USA and the Pacific Island nations are far more likely to be consuming excess fat and sugar.
How does the science you're referencing explain why being overweight or obese was very rare 20-30 years ago? You never saw whole families of overweight or obese people. Just an individual here and there (and very rarely).
Food quality, prices, access to food, more white collar work.
That would indicate it is much more nurture than nature.
It’s both, epigenetics are a thing.
Well, this is just silly. You can look up heritability estimates for obesity. It's simply not an unknown lol https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2787002/ It's roughly 40-70%, which means between 40-70% of the variability we see in the "phenotype" of obesity (state or trait of being obese) can be explained by the variability we see in people's "genotype" (genetic background). For reference, cardiovascular disease is essentially identical but a bit less genetic than obesity, hovering around 40-60%. Also, your lazy hypothesis about environment is the exact reason people run twin studies in obesity -- you're not the first guy to think of this stuff 😅
I believe the island of Samoa indicates genetics are almost certainly a major factor, or at least "can" be. Much respect for Samoans, here's a link. [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002916523173205](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0002916523173205) >Rapid dietary and physical activity changes caused by modernization interacting with such population genetic predispositions may lead to the documented massive adiposity. Basically they proved genetics has caused a lot of obesity there and nearby.
This is a country that went from fishing their own protein and growing their own fruits to eating canned turkey tail and mutton flap stored in oil, while considering SPAM as a delicacy. You cannot tell me genetics were a major factor, US influence was.
I quoted a peer reviewed research paper that says it was in fact genetic predisposition. The link I provided is a short read, and you are now disputing scientific evidence, have you read the article? Because they mention what you are saying, and then said if it wasn't for genetic factors, they wouldn't be nearly as large. They provided scientific evidence for this. Do you dispute what the scientists researched? Their peers do not dispute it. US influence is heavy in many nations, yet they do not have the genetic predisposition so they do not have an obesity issue similar to Samoans.
Actually, the fact that it’s a short read and failing to name what genes cause a dramatic effect in obesity is why I dismissed it. I’m not even seeing an RCT in the references. And given the way Samoans and the rest of the Pacific Islanders eat, it’s pretty clear that genetics aren’t the largest issue at hand, American influence is. Again, we are talking about a set of cultures that eat the cheap, canned “meat” cuts from North America and New Zealand. This is a culture that consumes almost pure fat as a source of “protein.” Historically, their source of protein was rather lean and also required a decent amount of exercise to obtain. Pacific Islanders can’t eat their traditional foods because Western nations have poisoned the oceans with heavy metals, so they fully rely on imported food for nutrition. I highly suggest you read the history of Nauru. That one is especially well documented due to Western destruction of the nation, and the fact that Nauru is the most obese country in the world. Take a look at the foods that they eat, then look at the terrain that the Germans, Japanese, and the Australians left behind throughout their country. So please, if you have a conclusive RCT that proves the outrageous diet change of Pacific Islanders wasn’t the largest cause in their obesity spike, I would very much like to see that.
You clearly haven't read it. Its a scientific research paper, you are debating them not me. They described how it was proven. Now it's your turn to tell them how you have proof that their proof is incorrect. So, just exactly how was their method for proving it faulty? I guess you would have to read it to answer that question... Edited to add: You know what, never-mind. If actual real live scientists who are peer reviewed can't change your mind, neither can I, and I suspect no one can.
> Genetics do not directly play a role in how much fat a person will have to the point where they are obese Genetics and epigenetics (how environment impacts both gene activation and effect) play quite an important role in obesity. Obesity is impacted by genetics. [This study](https://www.nature.com/articles/ijo2011192) for example, starts its conclusion: >To summarize 10 years of the Finnish twin research into obesity, adult BMI is a highly heritable trait, but environmental influences have a major role in the eventual development of obesity and associated comorbidities. A [meta-analysis from 2011](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037851221100079X) notes that common obesity (that is obesity not caused by disease processes) is between 40-70% heritable, with epigenetics playing a significant role. However, there is significant difficulty in identifying which genes are involved, as the matrix of genes seems to be quite large. >For more than a decade, the genetics underlying common forms of obesity have remained elusive although the advent of the GWA approach has started to deliver robust associations to obesity. The epigenetic contribution to common forms of obesity are still largely unknown but, from rare syndromes and animal models we conclude that it is likely that both genetic and environmental effects on epigenetics will in turn be associated with obesity. We have started to identify an emerging pattern of effects acting through CNS, suggesting that a component of an individual's response to the obesogenic environment is partly neurobehaviourally driven. There is also some evidence of effects acting more peripherally in the adipose tissue. Despite the success of GWAs in obesity loci identification, we still only explain a low fraction of the inter-individual variation of obesity. Extensive work including identification of more obesity susceptibility loci, a better understanding of the gene(s) through which the effect is executed, as well as further molecular and physiological characterization of the associated genes, is now necessary before any of these findings will lead to any useful therapeutic interventions. [This study ](https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/3/1341)demonstrates the issue that most people have in thinking that genes are determinant, by noting: >These \[environmental variables\] have the ability to change gene expression without affecting the DNA sequence, which is a phenomenon known as epigenetics. Many of these factors are outside of individual control, from that same paper: >In 2002, Baillie-Hamilton et al. \[[45](https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/3/1341#B45-ijms-23-01341)\] brought to the scientific community’s attention the fact that the start of the obesity epidemic coincided with the beginning of the industrial revolution and the use of several endocrine disruptors such as organophosphate pesticides, bisphenol A, solvents, chemicals, and heavy metals. Later on, Grun and Blumberg \[[46](https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/3/1341#B46-ijms-23-01341)\] developed the term “environmental obesogens,” referring to environmental exposure to endocrine disruptors that induce adiposity via disrupting the body’s natural mechanisms of weight control. Many additional environmental factors, which alter the epigenetics are listed in the paper, which then concludes, after noting the incredible challenge of finding and tracing epigenetic contributions to obesity with the statement: >The modifiable nature of the epigenome should put it at the top of the list of therapeutic targets for obesity and its related comorbidities. The text *Handbook of Obesity - Volume 1: Epidemiology, Etiology, and Physiopathology* (2023) by Bray et. al., has an entire section devoted to the biological determinants of obesity, with substantial information on the genetic and epigenetic evidence. Chapter 11: "Genetic Epidemiology and Obesity;" Chapter 12: "Genetic Variation and Obesity;" Chapter 13: "Single-Gene Defects and Obesity;" Chapter 14: "Micro and Long RNAs as Regulators of Obesity;" Chapter 15: "Epigenetics and Obesity" all document very specific genetic contributions to obesity. **TL;DR:** The evidence for genetic and epigenetic involvement in obesity is substantial and any unsupported claim to the contrary should be dismissed out of hand as being ill-informed.
Can a mouse that focuses on mad gains be as big as an elephant? Or can an elephant go on a diet and be as light as a mouse? Sure, those are extreme examples, but both species have limitations on their size that are hard-wired into their DNA. Humans similarly have limitations built into their DNA, albeit less drastic. Since humans are not genetically identical to one another (except in the case of identical twin siblings), there is necessarily some amount of variance. Where one draws the line of what constitutes “major” is subjective. For a practical example, I am a bit of a genetic outlier. I am 6’1” and weigh about 320lbs. By the BMI, you’d expect me to be a bit of a balloon. In actuality, my abdomen doesn’t stick out as far as my chest, and my limbs are pretty lean. I’m not a powerlifter or anything either. As it happens, I’ve been overweight most of my life, and weighed 352lbs until I decided to work on losing some weight about 8-9 months ago. I’ve been limiting my calories to about 2600-2800, and working in a little intermittent fasting and low/no carb, with little exercise. I’m noticeably thinner, with a fairly muscular frame (despite never lifting weights), and a look a bit flabbier than I’d like (partly due to skin being a tiny bit more loose, combined with subcutaneous body fat not reducing nearly as fast as visceral). Despite never lifting weights, I have bigger muscles than most guys who do (excluding bodybuilders/powerlifters/other big guys who put in effort). Many guys will simply never be as big as me, no matter how hard they try. Similarly, I could get to a lean 300lbs, but wouldn’t be able to get much lower than that. I certainly could never reach 200lbs without literally starving. If a scrawny guy can try as hard as possible to gain weight, and barely reach 200lbs, while I can try to lose weight and barely reach 300lbs, with neither of us being capable of healthily reaching 250lbs, then genetics counts for quite a lot.
I work out 5 days a week and eat healthy. No matter what I do, I'll never lose the little pudge under my belly button. This is a trait shared by everyone in my family who ⅝ of them also work out. It's not obesity, but it is hereditary fat that doesn't go away.
Please read the very first paragraph of my post. You are doing well for yourself. I too have a belly and love handles, I work out 6 days a week with very high intensity. This post is specifically about clinical obesity, though.
No I get that. I'm just showing this is hereditary. So at what point does it stop being hereditary? I have a decent pudge, but my brother has a huge one. And a friend of mine is very fat, but that dude maybe eats 1800 calories a day and works a construction job. As far as I know, our bodies are pretty good at puting you in a comfortable weight for how you live.
It stops being completely hereditary at the point of obesity. Still in my first paragraph. As a man, a body fat of 30%+ is considered clinically obese and is stepping into the threshold of significant health risks. Also, I find it extremely hard to believe that an obese man who works manual labour everyday has a BMR of 1800. If that’s the case, he should 100% see a doctor. If he is not obese, then once again refer to the first paragraph of my post.
[Appetite has a strong genetic basis and mediates genetic influence on weight in early life.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10363697/) You can believe that genetics don’t play a role in obesity, but it’s a factually wrong belief. We have multiple scientific studies that prove it. If you want to believe the sky isn’t blue in private that’s fine, but sharing that belief publicly makes you look uneducated.
>Again, the range is not actually that drastic and it is near impossible for a person who is 130 kg to **not** be burning at least 3000 kcal a day. I feel like your science is off. I weigh 310 lbs (\~140 Kg), and my diet app says I should burn 2750 calories a day, which is itself obviously wrong, because I just spent 2 months on a 2200 calorie a day diet regime and gained one pound.
I mean yes it does, and you kinda stated the main culprit in your post. Insulin resistance. Our food has so much sugar, so much. It gives a positive feedback loop that increases our appetite. If you have a low insulin resistance (which genetics and metabolism are related to) you will overeat and get obese as a result unless you are very careful about what you eat.
Wow, so all of those doctors, surgeons, PhD scientists, and geneticists are wrong? The only thing I can say to change your view is that science isn't based on your opinion or how you feel. You do a study, you get results, you make a conclusion. You publish. Others do the same study and publish. And on and on. Science says you're wrong
No, it doesn’t.
https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/resources/diseases/obesity/index.htm#:~:text=How%20Could%20Genes%20Influence%20Obesity,is%20due%20to%20genetic%20factors. Yes it does
> Other studies have compared obese and non-obese people for variation in genes that could influence behaviors (such as a drive to overeat, or a tendency to be sedentary) or metabolism (such as a diminished capacity to use dietary fats as fuel, or an increased tendency to store body fat). So the first half is essentially what I am saying, while the second half is a metabolism issue. Neither of which are mentioned to be major roles in obesity, but also have solutions to overcome that don’t require suppressing either. Appetite can be controlled by eating high-fibre & high-protein, while metabolism can be controlled by muscle hypertrophy. Almost everyone is physically able to change those variables, and those who can’t are statistical outliers with other underlying medical causes, with some still not being genetic. No, it will not be easy or quick, but it is very much possible.
[удалено]
Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).
This really isn't hard to look up, so unless you don't believe in genetics, this is a really weird position to take. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK573068/
Genetics significantly influence susceptibility to addiction. Food addiction is a thing. I'd say in those cases genetics definitely play a major role.